INCREASING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS BY DESIGN
by
LEAH COURTNEY GARDNER
(Under the Direction of MaryCarol Hunter)
ABSTRACT
The goal of this thesis work is two fold. First, a conceptual framework is developed for
the design of outdoor recreation areas that would act to increase environmental awareness of its
users. Second, a concept plan is created for a portion of the North Oconee River Greenway that
is based on a set of ecological design criteria that grows out of the conceptual framework. The
concept plan and its attendant management protocols serve the ecological design criteria by
improving the ecological health of a human-impacted site, encouraging human engagement with
nature by bringing people into the space, and increasing environmental awareness by offering positive recreational and educational experiences in nature. The ecological criteria are identified and are then met by applying appropriate ecological design principles to each design component regarding installation, use of materials, management practices, and educational objectives.
INDEX WORDS: Ecological Literacy, Greenway development, North Oconee River Greenway, Ecological design, Ecological restoration, Native plant communities of North Georgia, Granite outcrops, Vegetation management, Invasive exotic removal, Easley’s Mill, Cedar Shoals, Sustainable Living
INCREASING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS BY DESIGN
by
LEAH COURTNEY GARDNER
B.S., The University of Tennessee, 1997
A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ATHENS, GEORGIA
2004
© 2004
Leah Courtney Gardner
All Rights Reserved
INCREASING ENVIRONMENTAL AWARENESS BY DESIGN
by
LEAH COURTNEY GARDNER
Major Professor: MaryCarol Hunter
Committee: Alfred Vick David Porter Richard Field
Electronic Version Approved:
Maureen Grasso Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia December 2004
DEDICATION
For Dr. John W. Day
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A heartfelt thank you to my parents, Dean and Margaret Gardner; my sister Deanna
Long; my dear friend Chris Roark; Dr. John W. Day; Sam Rogers; the members of my advisory committee: MaryCarol Hunter, Richard Field, David Porter, and AlfieVick; Darrel Morrison;
Marianne Cramer; Donna Gabriel; John Ward; Dan Hope; John Devine; William Shealy; Cecil,
Debbie, Irene, and Gordie; my friends. Thank you so much for sharing your time, thoughts, and laughs with me.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... iv
LIST OF TABLES...... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ...... x
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1
Purpose of Thesis Study...... 1
Organization of Thesis ...... 2
2 BACKGROUND THINKING
Introduction ...... 4
Why is Ecological Literacy Critical to Environmental Protection? ...... 5
Fascination: An Effective Catalyst for Behavioral Change ...... 9
Does Landscape Architecture Contribute to Environmental Awareness and
Protection?...... 11
Summary ...... 14
3 GREENWAY FUNCTIONS
Introduction ...... 15
Ecological Roles of Greenways ...... 16
Designing to Perform These Roles Well: Applying Ecological Design Principles
to Greenway Development...... 19
Managing for Ecological Integrity in an Urban Context...... 22
vi
Where Humans and Nature Meet in Urban Settings ...... 25
Summary ...... 27
4 CASE STUDIES
Introduction ...... 30
Storytelling ...... 30
Art and Science ...... 32
Projects ...... 33
Summary ...... 39
5 THE PROJECT SITE
Introduction ...... 45
Oconee River Greenway Evolution: A Brief History ...... 45
Project Location and Existing Conditions...... 48
Easley’s Mill: The Beginning of Athens and the University of Georgia ...... 52
Ecological Significance of Granite Outcrops...... 54
Opportunities and Constraints at the Project Site...... 55
Summary ...... 57
6 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction ...... 69
Ecological Design Criteria ...... 69
Concept Plan...... 70
Oconee Street Parking Area ...... 70
Greenway Trail...... 72
Easley’s Mill Overlook ...... 74
vii
Boat Launches ...... 75
Vegetation Management...... 76
Educational Components...... 82
Summary ...... 83
7 CONCLUSIONS...... 92
Looking Back ...... 92
Lessons Learned...... 93
Looking Ahead...... 97
Final Thoughts...... 98
REFERENCES ...... 102
APPENDICES ...... 108
A Definition of terms characterizing ecosystem stability...... 109
B List of founding members of Sandy Creek Nature Center ...... 110
C Endemic species of granite outcrops...... 111
D A.D.A., Americans with Disabilities Act, trail requirements ...... 112
E General recommendations regarding canoe launch design...... 113
F Top ten exotic plant pests in Georgia ...... 115
G “Cut-treat” method of invasive exotic removal ...... 116
H Suggested native plant list for Zone C/Riparian...... 117
I Suggested native plant list for Zones D and E/Warm Season Grass and Wildflower
Meadow...... 119
J Suggested native plant list for Zone F/Dry slope in right-of-way ...... 120
K Definition of Service-Learning...... 121
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Characteristics of Conventional and Ecological Design ...... 29
Table 2: Design components in response to ecological design criteria, human desires, site
constraints, and education goals...... 100
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1: Flume at Portland’s Stormwater Gardens ...... 41
Figure 2: Paths through wetlands and ponds at Renton’s Waterworks Gardens ...... 41
Figure 3: Aerial view of Waterworks during construction ...... 42
Figure 4: Santa Rosa Creek before restoration ...... 42
Figure 5: Santa Rosa Creek after restoration ...... 42
Figure 6: Painting of Steelhead Trout breaking through a concrete barrier ...... 43
Figure 7: Volunteers planting natives along Codornices Creek ...... 43
Figure 8: Quail sculptures on Ohlone Greenway...... 44
Figure 9: Metal cow sculpture ...... 44
Figure 10: Map of North Oconee River Greenway ...... 58
Figure 11: Project Site Existing Conditions ...... 59
Figure 12: Project Site Current Ownership...... 60
Figure 13: Existing sign in Oconee Street parking area ...... 61
Figure 14: Utility access drive into greenway site over granite outcrop ...... 61
Figure 15: Asphalt on granite outcrop ...... 62
Figure 16: Mown utility easement looking south ...... 62
Figure 17: Historic stone and brick wall ...... 63
Figure 18: View of rapids looking north from historic wall...... 63
Figure 19: View west across North Oconee River, John Devine standing on historic wall……..64
x
Figure 20: View south below rapids ...... 64
Figure 21: River oats, Chasmanthium latifolium, on the bank of the North Oconee River...... 65
Figure 22: Retaining wall on granite outcrop ...... 65
Figure 23: Tommy Harris Amphitheater below retaining wall ...... 66
Figure 24: Covered structure and playground above retaining wall...... 66
Figure 25: Covered structure on south edge of granite outcrop...... 67
Figure 26: Homeless camp...... 67
Figure 27: Athens Factory ca. 1890...... 68
Figure 28: Dial America building and mill race October 30, 2004 ...... 68
Figure 29: Concept Plan...... 85
Figure 30: Oconee Street Parking Plan...... 86
Figure 31: Existing Oconee Street parking area ...... 87
Figure 32: Oconee Street parking area with proposed plantings ...... 87
Figure 33: Easley’s Mill Overlook Plan ...... 88
Figure 34: Vegetation Management Plan ...... 89
Figure 35: Stone and concrete picnic table in Dudley Park...... 90
Figure 36: Existing educational sign on North Oconee River Greenway...... 90
Figure 37: Metal sculpture, bench, and educational sign on North Oconee River Greenway
(sculpture and bench by local artist Harold Rittenberry) ...... 91
Figure 38: Detail of Metal Bench ...... 91
xi
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Thesis Study
This work began with a desire to grasp my role as a landscape architect in improving the quality of our environment. As human populations grow, so does the demand for the development of land to accommodate our needs. Non-human populations continuously forfeit their right to clean air, water, food, and shelter so that we may survive and be comfortable. Since human expansion is inevitable, I believe it is important to learn ways of designing, building, and managing landscapes that reflect a sense of stewardship and care towards the rest of the world rather than dominion over it.
The ultimate goal of this thesis study is to create a design that improves the ecological health of a human-impacted site, encourages interactions with nature by bringing people into the space, and increases awareness of the surrounding environment through experience and education. Many concepts are explored in efforts to reach this multi-layered goal, beginning with the vital connection between ecological literacy and environmental protection. I will then synthesize findings from background research and case studies and apply them to a site on the
North Oconee River Greenway. This design can serve as a demonstration project to be monitored, adjusted, and studied over time. The knowledge gained from any success or failure on this experimental site could be used to guide future development and management of the
Oconee River Greenway system.
1 Organization of Thesis
The link between environmental crises and the deficiency of ecological literacy is examined in the second chapter. Possible reasons for this lack of awareness are pointed out as well as things
currently being done to revive environmental interest. Ways of encouraging responsible ecological behavior are also discussed, such as promoting outdoor education and other positive experiences in nature. The landscape architecture profession’s involvement in environmental protection and improvement is the last issue addressed in this chapter.
In the third chapter, ecological functions of greenways are explained that serve to build the criteria for my design. Specific goals are set, then basic ecological design principles are identified that will ensure that my design ultimately meets these goals. Management objectives and strategies are then discussed that will balance the needs of both humans and nature without compromising ecological integrity. The last important greenway function described in this chapter is that they provide places for humans to engage with nature in urban environments.
The fourth chapter contains examples of contemporary landscape architecture that successfully combine art, science, and educational interpretation. The case studies are prefaced by a brief look into ecorevelatory landscapes, and then at the values of combining art and science in ecological landscape design. Each of these projects effectively communicates cultural and ecological information to the public while improving the environmental quality of their site.
The fifth chapter introduces the project site and documents the existing conditions. A short history of the North Oconee River Greenway is followed by a site analysis including significant cultural and ecological elements. Any known needs or desires for the site are also pointed out.
2 In the sixth chapter, the previously identified design criteria are applied to the site. A concept plan illustrates the overview, and then each design component is described in greater detail. Guidelines for managing the site after the design is in place are also stated.
The seventh and final chapter is a summary of this experience. The thesis ends with thoughts concerning the design process and outcome. Important issues are mentioned that require consideration yet were not fully addressed in this project.
3
CHAPTER 2
BACKGROUND THINKING
“We cannot win this battle to save species and environments without forging an emotional bond
between ourselves and nature as well – for we will not fight to save what we do not love.”
- Stephen Jay Gould (Orr Earth 43)
Introduction
The goal of my thesis work is to develop a design that improves the ecological health of a
site, makes it an inviting and pleasurable place to be, and communicates an environmental
message to the public. My approach to the design is based on the premise that people need to
reconnect with the natural world and that ecological literacy affects the state of our environment.
This chapter consists of three main parts, all of which help to support this premise. In the first
section, I will point out the link between environmental crises and the lack of ecological literacy:
what it means to be ecologically literate, possible reasons why many people are not, and what is
being done now to reintroduce ecological thinking back into our lives. The second section takes
a look at what motivates people to behave in ecologically responsible ways. Here I begin to
define what type of educational components to incorporate into the design. The third section is a
brief inquiry into what the profession of landscape architecture is doing to help our communities
live more sustainably through design and education.
4 Why is Ecological Literacy Critical to Environmental Protection?
In the words of paleontologist and evolutionary theorist Stephen Jay Gould, “we will not fight to save what we do not love.” (Orr Earth 43) Based on this concept, it is clear that developing an emotional attachment to our natural surroundings is critical to protecting our environment. Before we can love something, we must first get to know it. In Diversity of Life,
Harvard biologist E.O.Wilson described this relationship with other living things as biophilia, or an innate urge to affiliate or connect with nature.
Wilson wrote that this affinity for the natural world is sparked at an early age when we begin learning to love what is familiar, and that it cascades throughout our lives into cultural and social patterns. He speculated that this tendency to bond with what we know is inscribed in the brain from tens of thousands of years of evolutionary experience. In Earth in Mind, David Orr explains that the manifestation of biophobia, the counterpart to biophilia, “has lead to a world in which it is becoming easier to be biophobic.” (134) Man’s urge to control nature has replaced an undefiled environment with dammed rivers, floodgates, scraped mountain tops, and drained wetlands. All too often a wooded site is cleared and graded to build an elementary school, only to spend generations of volunteer efforts and funding to re-establish landscaping around the school. The destruction of natural systems and the spread of toxic substances have led to increased risks of cancer and other detrimental side effects to human health. This is reason enough for some people to stay indoors. “Biophobia sets into motion a vicious cycle that tends to cause people to act in such a way as to undermine the integrity, beauty, and harmony of nature, creating the very conditions that make the dislike of nature more probable.” (135)
With modern science and technology, we have the power to destroy our natural world as well as the knowledge of the consequences of doing so. This power was not available to cultures
5 before modernization. At some point between then and now, people have forgotten or have not been taught that the world is alive and worthy of respect. “Only in the last few centuries have technologies and attitudes of domination stemming from the scientific revolution turned the tables, enabling humans to threaten nature with deforestation and desertification, chemical pollution, destruction of habitats and species, nuclear fallout, and ozone depletion.” (Merchant
69) We’ve distanced ourselves from animals and view them as goods, use them as machines.
We’ve quieted any remaining sympathy for nature in favor of power and economic growth. Orr believes it is time for a biophilia revolution, “a combination of reverence for life and purely rational calculation by which we will want to both be efficient and live sufficiently. It is about finding our right place on earth and in the community of life, and it is about citizenship, duties, obligations, and celebration.” (Orr Earth 145) Orr sees that denial, the belief that all problems can be fixed with technology and money, and lack of imagination have combined as the major obstacles standing in the way of a biophilia revolution. In order to make it happen, education must be reshaped to help people become not only literate, but ecologically literate.
Being or becoming ecologically literate can imply many things. Recognizing the fact that environmental crises exist is a large part of ecological or environmental literacy. Being able to identify and effectively use tools and information to deal with these crises is another component.
Simply becoming familiar with one’s local environment and the basic processes that sustain it is one way to become more environmentally aware. According to physicist and systems theorist
Fritjof Capra, being ecologically literate, or ecoliterate, means “understanding the basic principles of ecology and being able to embody them in the daily life of human communities.”
He also describes it as “understanding the principles of organization that ecosystems have developed to sustain the web of life.” On a basic level, it means “seeing the world as an
6 interconnected whole.” (Capra) Environmental crises continually occur in part due to the lack of
ecological literacy today. If we do not know what is happening or what the consequences of our
actions might be, then how can we begin to change our behavior, or even know what needs to be
changed?
The process of becoming ecologically literate is made difficult by our educational system
according to David Orr. He warns that “schooling should not be confused with learning.”
Schooling does not necessarily increase intelligence, but has to do more with “the ability to
master basic functions that can be measured by tests.” (Orr Ecological xi) Learning, however,
always increases intelligence, involves moral judgment, and is not so easily measured. He
writes that some of the problems with modern education are that theories are emphasized rather
than values toward the natural world, answers are sought instead of questions, and that technical
efficiency is favored over conscience. Instead, he suggests that educators should “attempt to teach things that one might imagine the earth would teach us: silence, humility, holiness, connectedness, courtesy, beauty, celebration, giving, restoration, obligation, and wildness.” (Orr
Earth 52)
Orr identifies several myths associated with modern education that lead us away from ecological literacy, and new principles for rethinking it. One myth, that knowledge is increasing,
further illustrates the difference between schooling and learning. Yes we are experiencing an
information explosion, but we are losing wisdom, vernacular knowledge, and folk culture.
Robert Thayer feels that “while science and technology have made it possible to comprehend deeper levels of ecosystem knowledge, they have also enabled the physical cover-up and subsequent concealment of dimensions of the landscape once readily accessible to more primal peoples.” (Thayer 119) Another myth is that the purpose of education is to provide a means for
7 upward mobility and success. The problem with this was eloquently stated by Thomas Merton in
Love and Living. He likened formal education to a “mass production of people literally unfit for
anything except to take part in an elaborate and completely artificial charade.” (Orr Earth 13)
On the contrary, one of the new principles is that all education be environmental education. Ecological thinking must be incorporated into all levels and layers of learning.
Another principle proposes a new purpose for education. Rather than a means to success or a mastery of subject matter, a mastery of one’s own self should be the goal. Peter Buckley, co- founder of the Center for Ecoliteracy, believes that in addition to developing capacities for learning, education is “also for developing values and a framework that you see the world through.” (Kay) Ecological issues are really questions of value, and education is critical to forming and understanding these values in his point of view. He believes emotional arguments are more sustaining than logical ones when it comes to environmental protection. “I think you have to develop a view of what life is and develop a sense of awe and mystery about it. Once you get that in place then the idea of protecting it comes naturally.” (Kay)
Fortunately, people are doing their part in changing how many of us view, comprehend, and treat our environment for the better. Orr believes that a revolution in education is beginning that will reconnect young people to their habitats and communities. The classroom will be “the ecology of the surrounding community, not the confining four walls of the traditional school”
(Center for Ecoliteracy) Orr, Fritjof Capra, Peter Buckley, Zenobia Barlow, and Gay Hoagland are all directors of the Center for Ecoliteracy in Berkeley, founded in 1995. This organization is
“dedicated to education for sustainable living by fostering a profound understanding of the natural world, grounded in direct experience.” (Center for Ecoliteracy) This is accomplished by
supporting educational organizations and communities that teach sustainable ways of life
8 through gardening, cooking, sustainable agriculture, and habitat restoration. Buckley says their organization is about telling stories that hopefully will inspire people to see the world in a new, positive light and lead to beneficial change.
The Center for Ecological Literacy is one of many groups and organizations working hard to promote environmental awareness and stewardship in our society. Others include the
Center for Environmental Education of the Antioch New England Institute, the North American
Association of Environmental Education, and the Living on Earth Ecological Literacy Project launched by National Public Radio’s weekly environmental news program. Accredited
Landscape Architecture programs are offering more courses in ecological and sustainable design such as the San Francisco Institute of Architecture, University of Michigan, and the University of
Washington’s College of Architecture and Urban Planning. At CAUP, one of the three focus areas within the landscape architecture program is designing for ecological literacy. All of these institutions and countless others like them are playing an important role in incorporating ecological thinking into our educational systems and into our lives.
Fascination: An Effective Catalyst for Behavioral Change
In many cases, environmental problems can not be solved unless large numbers of people know of them and commit to correcting them. Unfortunately, “popular awareness of ecological values seems more often to be framed in terms of one or another potential catastrophe – from nuclear winter to global warming – that must be averted through changing specific human patterns of behavior.” (Howett 80) Regulations and incentives are two catalysts that aid in solving these problems. They are opposite in nature, yet their establishment relies on scientific data and human emotional response. Regulations are “usually triggered by fear of catastrophe” and are successful in some ways but not in others. (Galatowitsch 99) For example, point source
9 water pollution may be managed by issuing discharge permits, whereas non point pollution
sources are not as easily measured and it took much longer to realize and regulate their
discharge. In situations where regulating doesn’t seem to work, offering incentives may be more
effective. Although financial rewards can make a positive difference (opportunities were created
to restore 90,000 acres of U.S. drained wetlands between 1987 and 1990 through financial
incentives for farmers), other tactics which evoke emotional attachment may be more beneficial
to the environment in the long run.
“If the rewards are solely monetary, however, the interest and commitment to these environmental restorations are sure to be fleeting. Incentives likely to be more durable are those that increase appreciation for environmental quality, either directly through experiences or indirectly through education. This mode relies on people experiencing places, understanding their relevance, and wanting to have more places like them.” (Galatowitsch 99)
What could it be about our experiences in nature that affects how we treat the environment? In July 2001, an article was published in Environment and Behavior that investigates this very topic. A study was conducted in which college students were taken to a marsh reserve and four emotive perceptions were measured: being away: “Spending time here gives me a break from my day to day routine”; fascination: “This place has fascinating qualities”; degree of coherence: “It is chaotic here”; and compatibility: “I can do things I like here” (from The Perceived Restorativeness Scale developed by Hartig, Korpela, Evans, and
Garling in 1997). The results suggested that those students who were more interested in the marsh engaged in more ecological behavior, such as driving less or recycling more. In other words, “people who engage in appreciative rather than consumptive or motor-based outdoor recreation are more likely to behave proenvironmentally.” (Hartig 603)
10 Findings from this study show that measuring these perceptions can help to prioritize
measures for promoting ecological behavior. A heavier focus on fascination is encouraged
because it appears to be the “sole direct predictor of ecological behavior and at the same time the
mediator through which perceptions of being away, coherence, and compatibility exert their
influences on ecological behavior” (Hartig 601). The findings also suggest that a link exists
between emotional attachment and protective behavior, and that positive experiences in natural
environments lead people to engage in ecological behavior. “As fear and threat can in some instances result in the denial of environmental hazard, such as when it is perceived to be beyond personal control, attempting to instill such negative feelings could actually work against involvement in environmentally protective activities.” On the other hand, “attention to fascination, restoration, and other positive motivations might be better suited to promoting ecological behavior.” The scientists who conducted this experiment suggest that one way to increase fascination with natural environments and ecological processes (which in turn will increase ecological behavior) is through environmental instruction. (Hartig 603)
Does Landscape Architecture Contribute to Environmental Awareness and Protection?
Robert France, Associate Professor at the Harvard Design School, investigates this issue
in his article “Green World, Gray Heart?” with a series of questions. “What are the realities, illusions, and efficacies of nature-sustaining design?” “Does adding green or sustainable before landscape architecture create a redundancy or an oxymoron?” Is landscape architecture environmentally constructive or destructive? And perhaps most importantly, “can the designers who shape a small portion of our built environment offer anything more than better designed deck chairs more pleasingly arranged?” (France “Green” 32, questioning the futility of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic).
11 In seeking answers to these queries, France first examines landscape architecture’s role in
fostering environmental sustainability as a profession, then takes a closer look at site-specific
designs. He notes that according to a 1992 American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA)
survey, “only three of forty-three degree programs had ever offered a full-credit course on environmental ethics.” (France “Green” 33) In 1993, ASLA adopted a Declaration of
Environment and Development but France sees very little improvement since then. Although he recognizes a paradigm shift in the popular press, in books like Lyle’s Design for Human
Ecosystems and Thayer’s Gray World, Green Heart, and in academic programs, he is skeptical
of whether or not this shift is evident in actual landscape design practice. He accuses many
landscape architects of wrongfully claiming or only superficially attending to green or
sustainable design, and that instead, their “hearts are no greener than those of the environmental
engineers they are quick to criticize.” (France “Green” 33)
After reviewing projects covered in Landscape Architecture Magazine over the last ten
years, France concludes that most landscape architects ignore greenness and do not incorporate
sustainability into their work. Using the US Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) rating system, less than a third of this sample received more
sustainable moderate-to-high water rating credits. “Based on this sample, “standard” landscape
architecture is not “green.””(France “Green” 34)
France does, however, find hope in the “functional art” of multi-function storm water
wetland parks. He believes landscape architects can contribute to sustaining nature by
combining the “feeling of art and the knowing of science” to create wetland parks that not only
effectively manage water but also provide opportunities for recreation and education. (France
12 “Green” 35) Ten examples are highlighted in this article and are praised for improving the
ecology of the sites and for inspiring activism among their users.
Possible responses to the questions posed by France in the beginning of this article are as
follows. First, what are the illusions and realities of nature-sustaining design? One major misconception is that built landscapes are sustainable because they happen outdoors and may include plants and other natural elements. The truth is that some projects actually harm the environment by increasing runoff, polluting water and soil, and reducing biodiversity. Second, can calling landscape architecture green or sustainable be an oxymoron? Yes. According to
Robert Thayer, landscape architecture is “dominated by the creation of pleasant, illusory places which either give token service to environmental stewardship values, or ignore them altogether.”
(France “Green” 33) Unless the project improves or sustains the ecological quality of the site, it should not claim to. Third, does landscape architecture harm or heal the environment? The potential exists for both scenarios. As previously mentioned, some projects actually degrade the environment. However, France found from examining the projects in LAM, that even those that received little or no LEED credits may have slightly improved upon the existing site conditions.
He concludes that “on average, the projects published in the profession’s primary magazine neither harm nor help nature.” (34) And finally, can landscape architects significantly benefit the environment by improving or sustaining nature through individual site design? Yes. France is convinced that by “melding engineering and aesthetics, developing what might be called
“functional art,” landscape architects can contribute to sustaining nature.” (35) The functional and beautiful storm water wetland parks he describes demonstrate this honestly and successfully.
Furthermore, they communicate their ecological importance to the users, and in this way contribute to increasing environmental awareness.
13 In reaction to “Green World, Gray Heart?” William Thompson, editor of Landscape
Architecture Magazine, agrees with some of France’s criticisms. He, too, sees that landscape
architecture has the potential to play a role in sustaining the environment; but wonders if there is
“a contradiction between stewardship of the land and the desire of a designer to give aesthetic
form to the landscape.” (Thompson 5) He admits that very few of the 2003 ASLA award winners
were developed with ecology at their core, and cites only one example that was. In the end,
Thompson acknowledges the existence of landscapes architects who can effectively combine
aesthetics with ecological fitness. Unfortunately, there just aren’t enough of them.
Summary
Several topics regarding environmental awareness and protection have been touched on
in this chapter. The lack of environmental awareness is a serious problem. An obvious remedy
is to provide the means by which people can become more aware. Ecological design can do this
where the aim is to protect and improve elements of one particular place, and to communicate
the importance of doing so in ways that many different people can understand. Sparking fascination, grabbing someone’s attention, inspiring awe in someone’s mind – these things can trigger the spread of ecological literacy in a community. According to Robert France, “the single most effective action that can be accomplished for the future of nature is to motivate and inspire large numbers of people.” This motivation will come from various experiences, but also from
“educating and directly engaging people in the recognition and repair of damaged landscapes.”
(France “Green” 35) The goal of my thesis application is to design a place where residents of
Athens Clarke County can become aware of, connect with, and develop a sense of stewardship towards their environment.
14
CHAPTER 3
GREENWAY FUNCTIONS
“As ecosystems lose their diversity, so do our own patterns of thought. Designing for
biodiversity will require us to break free of our monoculture of the mind and see clearly our
embeddedness in the living world” -- Sim VanderRyn (VanderRyn 142)
Introduction
This chapter is divided into four sections. Ecological roles of greenways are explained in the first section. These roles will serve to begin building the criteria for my design. By exploring the ecological functions greenways perform, and then pointing out general objectives that are applicable to the scope of this project, three specific goals for the design are identified. In the
next section, basic principles of ecological design relevant to greenway design are discussed and
distilled into three major guidelines. When followed, these guidelines will ensure that the
ecological criteria are met by the design. In the third section, I discuss management goals and
strategies to preserve the ecological integrity of the site after the design is installed. The focus
here is on the methods for managing for biodiversity while balancing other ecological and human
needs. Finally, the fourth section describes another important greenway function – to provide a place for interactions between humans and nature.
15 Ecological Roles of Greenways
Charles Little, author of Greenways for America, defines a greenway in two ways. In
some instances, it is a “linear open space established along either a natural corridor, such as a
riverfront, stream valley, or ridgeline, or over land along a railroad right-of-way converted to
recreational use, a canal, a scenic road, or other route.” It can also be an “open space connector
linking parks nature reserves, cultural features, or historic sites, with each other and populated
areas.” (Smith 10) Some greenways include trails for human use and emphasize recreation,
while others focus on biological conservation and preservation of ecological integrity. Although
these goals are different, they usually overlap and most greenways support a combination of
both.
In the broadest ecological terms, greenways have the potential to both protect and
connect valuable natural resources. In the wake of residential, commercial, and industrial
development, the number and size of natural areas continues to shrink. The quality of natural space that does still exist is declining. If designed and managed properly, a greenway can protect these natural areas, the wildlife that live there, and the habitat they need to survive. By connecting these natural areas to each other, “naturally vegetated corridors can play a key role in allowing wildlife to move between habitat areas that would otherwise be isolated from one another.” (Smith 13) One important benefit associated with providing for animal and plant movement is the increase of long-term health among populations by “increasing genetic exchange and by maintaining natural demographic process.” (14)
More specifically, greenways can counteract some of the major problems associated with development including the loss of natural space which leads to loss of habitat diversity,
fragmentation of existing natural space, degradation of water resources (i.e. erosion,
16 sedimentation, contamination), and a decrease in nature’s ability to respond to perturbation. A greenway can be designed to minimize these negative impacts by operating in one or more of these six basic ways:
• as habitat for plant and animal communities • as a conduit facilitating the movement of plants, animals, water, sediment, and nutrients • as a barrier preventing movement of elements listed above • as a filter allowing some elements to pass while inhibiting others • as a source by helping to provide animals or seeds that can move to other parts of the landscape • as a sink for trapping animals or seeds thus preventing further passage
Providing habitat to support biological communities is something greenways do with varying degrees of success. Depending on the species to be protected, the size and type of habitat required differs, and some species require more natural area than others. For example, a
200 foot wide greenway may provide habitat for fewer species than one that is a half a mile wide. In some instances however, a narrower greenway with more structural variation may provide habitat for just as many species as a larger one with less variation. Greenways can act as conduits for water, animals, plants, and even people allowing them to move from one isolated patch of a landscape to another. Alternately, a greenway can act as a barrier for some species or ecosystem resources. For example, a river may keep small mammals from crossing to the other side. The greenway acts as a filter when its vegetation strains harmful sediment and pollution out of storm water runoff before it reaches a river or stream. Even a narrow strip of green space such as a hedgerow can be a source of seeds for the surrounding landscape. A greenway that acts as a sink traps animals and plants preventing them from moving on. Not every greenway can serve all of these purposes all of the time. Of these six ecological functions, the provision of habitat and conduits are the most important for maintaining wildlife health and diversity.
17 Urban and rural streamside greenways can serve as buffers between waterways and adjacent lands with intensive human uses. These types of buffers can help maintain and improve water quality, stabilize hydrologic regimes, and maintain healthy and diverse aquatic habitat. As previously mentioned vegetated riparian corridors can filter out excess nutrients in groundwater through vegetative uptake and physically block eroding sediment from reaching the water and covering stream beds. Streamside greenways, especially those containing wetlands, can also help maintain natural water levels and flow rates, thus decreasing the magnitude and damage of floods. Protecting water quality is crucial for maintaining healthy aquatic communities. Riparian vegetation shades the stream and lowers water temperatures, produces organic matter the organisms need to eat, and helps to create diverse microhabitats like pools and riffles, the required habitat of certain organisms. (Smith 14)
With these ecological functions in mind, I’ve distilled them into three design criteria that are relevant and applicable to the project site. First and foremost, the design recommendations will be geared towards improving and protecting water quality. Second, all design recommendations regarding plant material - the addition, removal, or management of vegetation
- will focus on increasing structural and species diversity. And third, negative environmental impacts of development will be minimized. In other words, any significant ecological element on the site, existing or proposed, will be protected from damage by human use. As for management recommendations, the site will be protected from further development deemed harmful to the ecological health of the greenway. And, the management plan will be flexible enough to accommodate the probability of change. This is discussed in greater detail in the section entitled Managing for Ecological Integrity later in this chapter. Although the scope of this project will produce a design for only one segment of the Oconee Rivers Greenway,
18 establishment of the three ecological functions will improve the ecological health of this site at
least, and could theoretically have a positive effect downstream.
Designing to Perform These Roles Well: Applying Ecological Design Principles to Greenway
Development
The ecological goals for this project have been identified and basic design guidelines will
be used to check that the final design meets the criteria. In this section, I will define ecological
design, and discuss some of the problems associated with conventional design concepts. Finally,
I will point out the ecological design principles associated with the stated goals of this project.
Ecological design combines the analytical use of scientific information with creative
exploration and problem solving. Joan Naasauer sees ecology and design as “two very different
ways of looking at and prescribing action in the landscape;” where “ecology is scientific study and design is creative cultural action.” (Johnson and Hill 217) Ecological design, a combination of the two, is “any form of design that minimizes environmentally destructive impacts by integrating itself with living processes.” (VanderRyn 18) It requires the ability to comprehend patterns that connect as well as the knowledge of how nature works. Possessing ecological design competence means “maximizing resource and energy efficiency, taking advantage of the free services of nature, recycling wastes, making ecologically smarter things and educating ecologically smarter people.” (Orr Earth 104) Some would say that ecological design is
synonymous with good design. Certain characteristics typify good designs including appropriate
scale, simplicity, efficiency, durability, and redundancy. Good design solves several problems at
once and begins by asking “What is here? What will nature permit us to do here? What will
nature help us do here?” (146, quoting Wendell Berry) Surprising synergies tend to occur when
19 good design is integrated in all levels of society; however, “when people fail to design carefully,
lovingly, and competently, unwanted side effects and disasters multiply.” (105)
Since humans first learned to cultivate plants over 12, 000 years ago, we have been
designing ecosystems. We still are and will continue to do so in order to provide basic
necessities for our growing population. The ecosystems we change must still face the same
natural forces and disturbances regardless of whether they are more or less diverse, stable, or
productive regardless of our impact has altered their function. Without conscious understanding of how natural processes work, we have unintentionally created new ecosystems that do not work very well. How can we predict the way a new ecosystem will work if we don’t even know that it is a system? (Lyle 15) The cumulative impact of our everyday activities will continue to be devastating until we learn to preserve ecological integrity by design. We continue
“substituting design intelligence for the extravagant use of energy and materials” in the name of progress (VanderRyn 19). Instead of valuing landscapes and supporting natural ecosystem processes, we seek “narrowly productive landscapes that are stripped of their wider ecological significance.” (116) When comparing nature’s cycles to that of humans, natural ones are diverse and cyclical while ours tend to be linear and wasteful. The presence of unutilized wastes is usually a symptom of poor design. Over time design has been broken apart into many separate technical disciplines, “each with its own specialized language and tools.” (20) In order to make good design decisions that are in keeping with nature’s own patterns and cycles, these disciplines must be reconnected and we must learn to effectively interweave human and natural design effectively.
Good ecological design is a partnership with nature that integrates human purpose with natural flows and cycles. It “matches biological diversity with cultural diversity rather than
20 compromising both the way conventional solutions do.”(VanderRyn 23) Ecological design
responds to the unique characteristics of each site such as the soil, vegetation, climate,
topography, and wildlife. It has the ability to deepen our sense of place by acknowledging these
distinctive qualities and in many cases highlighting and enhancing them. (24) Design
competence is evident in nature’s diverse systems; so by using nature as a basis for design “we
can vastly diminish the environmental impacts of everything we make and build.” (19)
Designing with nature benefits both people and ecosystems. For example, a river corridor is
restored to a healthier state by a design where the water is allowed to flow its natural course and
diverse vegetation is added to moderate flow and control erosion. By design, this landscape can
increase wildlife habitat, provide a place for human recreational opportunities, and help control
flooding (see Table 1 on page 29).
In describing many of the general principles of ecological design, I have found three
main ideas that will aptly serve as guidelines for my design. First I will recognize the
connectedness of all elements involved. Understanding this will help to attain the goal of
protecting and improving water quality. For example, if a parking lot must be built at a higher elevation than the river (as in the case for the project site), measures will be taken to reduce runoff of storm water directly into the river. Using porous paving materials and planting
a dense vegetative buffer between the lot and the river will help keep contaminants from the
automobiles from reaching the nearby river. Recognizing that uphill activities can affect
downhill processes is a fundamental part of ecological design. The second principle is to design
with nature and look to it for inspiration. This will be helpful in determining where to position
the trail, among other things. It may be impossible to build a trail where the topography is too
steep, or a boardwalk may be more appropriate than an asphalt path where the soil tends to be
21 wet. Looking to nature will also aid in developing a plant palette. A good starting point is
noticing what type of plants grow on the sunny dry slope or which ones thrive in the shady moist
soils. Once the palette is compiled, invasive exotic plants can be removed and replaced with
native species. This will increase biological diversity, the second ecological goal. Finally, every
component of the design should balance ecological and human needs. The aim here is “not to
dominate nature but to participate creatively in its processes.” (Lyle 16) In other words, people
should not be allowed to trample a very sensitive ecosystem such as a restored granite outcrop.
However, rather than completely restricting access in order to preserve it, a trail could come
close enough for people to view it and learn about it through interpretational signs or displays.
This compromise would protect the ecosystem from harm and simultaneously afford people the
freedom to experience it. By following this third principle, the goal of protecting ecological
elements and reducing environmental impacts will be met.
Managing for Ecological Integrity in an Urban Context
“The fundamental goal of ecological design should be to maintain ecological integrity,
also referred to as ecological health.” (Smith 24) Possessing ecological integrity is to have
natural levels of plant productivity, a high level of native biological diversity, naturally low rates
of erosion and nutrient loss, and clean water. (24) Management is crucial to maintaining the
health of any landscape, but is an especially important component of ecological design. This is
because the design of an ecosystem is probabilistic, meaning it is easier to predict what might happen in the future rather than what will happen. (Lyle 18) A flexible management regime will be more effective in achieving stability than following a static set of rules or guidelines.
Strategies that promote stability within a designed landscape include encouraging biodiversity and paying attention to interactions within the structure of an ecosystem. These two broad
22 concepts will be discussed first, and then I will point out some design objectives that directly
apply to an urban streamside greenway.
What is biodiversity and can it really promote stability? Biodiversity is the pattern of connections that maintains life on earth, the “most exquisite form of complexity in the world. It is holistic and dynamic.” (VanderRyn 135) Biodiversity implies that diversity exists on three
levels, from genetics, to species, to communities. All three levels can and must be addressed by
maintaining viable populations of native species, protecting representatives of all native
ecosystem types in many states of succession, and by honoring broad scale ecological processes
such as fire, hydrologic cycles and movement patterns. Stability is “the tendency of a system to
remain near an equilibrium point or to return to it after a disturbance,” and can be characterized
by seven different qualities. Constancy, persistence, inertia, elasticity, amplitude, cyclical
stability, and trajectory stability all affect the stability of an ecosystem (see Appendix A for
definitions of these terms). Since many factors that influence these characteristics are unique to
every ecosystem, it is difficult to generalize ecosystem stability by measuring all seven. In an
effort to simplify and apply ecological information to design, John Lyle suggests reducing these
seven overlapping characteristics into two: resistance and resiliency. (Lyle 201) So, does
biodiversity promote stability? In most instances, the answer is yes. In the broadest terms,
complex and diverse structures tend to be more resistant and resilient than simpler ones. In other
words, “a diverse system simply has more glue to hold it together, but we cannot conclude from
this that more diverse always means more stable.” (202) However, “complexity tends to protect a
system from total collapse” in the face of disturbance. (201)
Every element in a landscape plays a role in keeping the ecosystems intact. By learning
to identify the structure, or the major species and key interactions of a particular landscape, “we
23 can seek out ways of expanding or modifying or even reshaping it to accommodate human
purposes.” (Lyle 204) The most critical of these interactions occur between three groups: humans, plants, and animals. Regarding design issues however, the interactions between people and plants are sometimes more crucial because we influence animals by manipulating plants and water. (205) If the structure of an ecosystem is properly identified and the management strategies work as they should, “monitoring, feedback, and corrective design (management) will take care of most mistakes.”(204) In an urban landscape, such as a greenway, the lack of interactions between species and their life-support systems will usually cause ecosystems to fail rather than the lack of species diversity.
“The plants brought from all over the world and thrown indiscriminately together do not form a cohesive community. Each left its own network of relationships behind: the animals it fed and protected the other plants it shaded or took shade from, the soil that it held in place and drew nutrients from. Some important elements are conspicuously missing…thus eliminating a whole regime of ground-level interactions and breaking nutrient cycles.” (Lyle 204)
It is impossible to know everything about every element and interaction in an ecosystem.
We can, however, identify the major ones and make conscious design and management decisions accordingly. Whatever the scale, the main goal should be to manage for the highest level of native biological diversity that is compatible to both environmental and human needs. To do this a designer must consider “the needs of species sensitive to fragmentation and human disturbance over the needs of weedy opportunistic species that tolerate or thrive in human dominated landscapes.” (Smith 62) In addition to maximizing the number of species, a wide variety of habitat types is critical to maintaining diversity on a greenway. This will lend to the ecological integrity of a site and preserve a range of habitats as local examples of biological diversity for educational and recreational purposes. (38)
24 So, within the over arching goal of managing for ecological integrity, a strong argument for maximizing biodiversity is made. To meet this design goal for my project I will recommend the replacement of invasive exotic plant species with diverse native vegetation; and will use the same native plant palette to restore biodiversity to human-impacted areas of the greenway corridor. The next important management issue is to recognize that relationships and interactions between all elements of the landscape exist. As previously stated, it is impossible to know everything about an ecosystem. But, through careful monitoring and corrective design, a flexible set of management guidelines will help promote a certain level of stability and health. Another relationship that requires careful consideration is the one between aesthetics and ecology. Both must be taken into account simultaneously in designing a greenway to prevent conflicts between visual preference and ecological integrity. Research has shown that people prefer high levels of visual complexity in naturalistic landscapes as long as they are perceived overall as a coherent and legible whole. (Smith, 38) Sometimes, the appearance of an ecologically healthy landscape does not fit society’s aesthetic ideals, appearing too weedy or wild. Since this thesis involves combining ecological goals with human involvement in an urban greenway setting, care must be taken to balance ecological integrity with aesthetic appeal.
Where Humans and Nature Meet in Urban Settings
Humans depend on nature to fulfill both physical and emotional needs. As organisms, we breathe air, drink water, and ingest food that nature provides. But beyond basic requirements for survival, “people also have a deep psychological and spiritual need for nature as they try to balance often frenetic, stressful lives in a mechanized “human” environment by searching for serenity, beauty, and relaxation in the natural world.” (Smith 209) Plants are thought by some to
“take away some of the anxiety and tension of the immediate Now by showing us that there are
25 long enduring patterns of life.” (Lyle 210) This emotional relationship between humans and nature is the focus of this section, as well describing how urban greenways can be instrumental in fostering this bond.
Today, many people spend a majority of time in man-made environments, but our species evolved in the natural world. The human eye is most sensitive to light at a wavelength of 553 nanometers, which is a yellow-green approximately the average color of plant leaves. It is believed that the physiological structure of our eyes evolved while being continuously exposed to nature, so “apart from the human face, our most essential visual imagery is probably that of the landscape.” (Lyle 208) It is suggested that our ancestors developed an emotional attachment to plants over those years of evolution that may still be a fundamental part of us today. This bond between nature and people is a two-way relationship, meaning that what people gain from experiences in nature directly affects how they treat nature in return. Appreciation for the natural world grows out of positive experiences in nature whether through athletic recreation, passive viewing, or intellectual study. Developing respect for nature “can be more powerful than anything taught in the classroom or written in a book and may ultimately lead people to a more thoughtful, ethical relationship with the natural environment.” (Smith 17)
Robert Searns, founding owner of Urban Edges, Inc., expresses his concern for the current human state of mind in his article entitled “Unplugged and Reconnected: Working towards a New Mentality for Trails.” He contemplates our endless supply of material goods and that while we seemingly have everything we need or desire, we have created this emotional void within ourselves partly due to information and sensory overload. “We are on the verge of being overwhelmed by a constant flow, becoming a torrent of information, a constant need to process and make decisions.” (Searns) He sees trails, paths, and open green spaces as perfect settings for
26 humans to find freedom from this artificiality and over-stimulation. Movement by our own
power – walking, riding a bike, paddling a boat – reconnects us with ourselves and with nature
according to Searns, and greenways provide a place for this to happen.
By creating opportunities for people to engage in direct contact with nature, greenways
can be an important means of promoting environmental consciousness and stewardship. Daily
travel through a greenway, as an alternative to motorized transportation, provides engagement
with nature on a regular basis. This is especially important to people living in densely populated
urban environments because greenways often fit easily into this type of setting. They are a
“focal point of interactions between people and nature” (Smith 209) and are prime examples of
what John Lyle describes as human ecosystems. These are “places in which human beings and
nature might be brought together again after a very long and dangerous period of estrangement.”
(Lyle 15) Reconnecting people with nature, as discussed in chapter 2, is crucial to increasing
environmental awareness.
Summary
Designing a greenway involves a great number of issues and each one holds its own level
of complication and importance. Recognizing how interconnected these issues are may be the
first steps towards developing a successful greenway design. Once the goals are in place, the
design, implementation, and management must be thought out carefully and decisions should be made consciously and intentionally. In this case, a small section of a greenway will be designed to simultaneously improve the ecological health of the site while offering sensory rich, aesthetically pleasing, and educational experiences to its users. This design can also serve as a template for future development along the same river corridor.
27 In learning about the basic ecological functions greenways are capable of performing, I came up with three general ecological goals for my design. For each design component, these questions will be asked: Does this improve or reduce water quality? Will this increase or decrease biodiversity? Will this cause negative environmental impacts? The rules I follow in order to fulfill these ecological goals will be to recognize connectedness, to design with nature, and ultimately to balance the ecological needs of the site with those of its human users. This same information will be passed onto site users through educational signage and displays.
People, especially those living in urban environments, need to connect with the natural world on a regular basis. A greenway where respect for nature is apparent is a good place for this to happen.
28 Table 1 - Characteristics of Conventional and Ecological Design
Issue Conventional Design Ecological Design
Usually nonrenewable and Whenever feasible, renewable: solar, destructive, relying on fossil fuels Energy source wind, small-scale hydro, or biomass; or nuclear power; the design the design lives off solar income consumes natural capital Restorative materials cycles in which High-quality materials are used waste for one process becomes food for clumsily, and resulting toxic and Materials use the next; designed-in reuse, recycling, low-quality materials are discarded flexibility, ease of repair, and in soil, air, and water durability Common and destructive, ranging Used extremely sparingly in very Toxic substances from pesticides to paints special circumstances Economics, custom, and Human and ecosystem health, Design criteria convenience ecological economics Standard templates are replicated Responds to bioregion: the design is Sensitivity to all over the planet with little regard integrated with local soils, vegetation, ecological to culture or place; skyscrapers materials, culture, climate, topography; content look the same from New York to the solutions grow from place Cairo Employs standardized designs with Biological, high energy and materials Maintains biodiversity: the locally cultural, and throughput, thereby eroding adapted cultures and economies that economic biological, cultural, and economic support it diversity diversity Integrates multiple design disciplines Knowledge base Narrow disciplinary focus and wide range of sciences; comprehensive Works with whole systems: produces Divides systems along boundaries designs that provide the greatest Whole systems that do not reflect the underlying possible degree of integrity and natural processes coherence Design must be imposed on nature Includes nature as a partner: whenever to provide control and possible substitutes nature’s own Role of nature predictability and meet narrowly design intelligence for heavy reliance defined human needs on materials and energy Nature and technology are hidden; Nature and technology are made Types of the design does not teach us over visible; the design draws us closer to learning time the systems that ultimately sustain us
(VanderRyn 26)
29
CHAPTER 4
CASE STUDIES
“I am convinced that most Americans have no idea what a decent forest looks like. The only
way to tell them is to show them.” - Aldo Leopold (Orr Earth 64)
Introduction
Three main segments make up this chapter. The first segment contains thoughts on
communicating information to site users and introduces the concept of narrative landscapes. The
next segment examines the connection between science and art in the designed landscape and
highlights the importance of combining the two to create beautiful and ecologically functional spaces. Finally, four contemporary case studies that exemplify this combination of ecological function and beauty are examined for their ability to provide both recreational and educational opportunities.
Storytelling
The vital link between environmental awareness and protection was established in the
preceding chapters. To create ecologically sound landscapes that promote sustainability, a
designer must look for opportunities to creatively communicate information to the site users.
Sometimes “the story told may be as important as the functions fulfilled.” (Thompson and Sorvig
293) Various methods of storytelling include interpretive signage, self-guided tours, and literally
telling visitors the story of a place through lectures, movies, or displays.
30 Less overtly, landscapes can tell their own stories when their ecological processes are
visible rather than hidden beneath the surface. This narrative type of landscape is sometimes
called ecorevelatory, a term coined by members of the Landscape Architecture department at the
University of Illinois and formalized through a conference and its published account. (Thompson and Sorvig 17) An ecorevelatory landscape is one where ecological phenomena, processes, and relationships are made visible or revealed. By definition, this term “would best apply to the
design of nature trails, where an educational path points out elements of an existing ecosystem,
and among other things, human effects on it.” (18) Juxtaposing natural and cultural systems is
an effective way of illuminating their differences and is “inherently interesting and increasingly
necessary.” (Galatowitsch 101) Catherine Howett cautions that losing sight of these differences
could be detrimental to our society:
“However much contemporary culture may distance us from intense awareness of our primal engagement with nature, it is impossible to imagine that the kind of human life to which most of us aspire could be psychologically or spiritually sustained if human culture so dominated the natural world that the very image of its differences disappeared.” (Howett, 94)
It is clear that teaching people about the ecology of a place is vital to protecting nature.
Experiencing an ecorevelatory greenway is an effective means of revealing both ecological and
cultural elements rather than hiding them. An important aspect of ecological design is that each
site’s unique qualities and limitations must be carefully considered during the design process.
Consequently, decisions on which aspects of human cultural history should remain evident or be
erased must be carefully weighed. “To argue that human influence should never be hidden,
without also asking whether that influence is destructive or sustainable, is to trivialize the
complexity of relations between humans and the rest of the world.” (Thompson and Sorvig18)
31 Art and Science
A perceived dichotomy exists between art and science as they relate to landscape design.
Some feel that art alone does little to solve environmental problems or improve ecological
health, and even undermines these goals in some instances. “The conception of a designed
landscape as purely a work of art – as a visual object arrayed “out there” in space to be admired as beautiful by a distanced human observer – obviously works against awareness of the landscape as a dynamic, changing, and exchanging force field of ecological process in which humans are actively immersed and engaged.” (Howett 84) Although art can draw attention to
environmental dilemmas and spark conversation concerning controversial issues, some speculate
that art itself does little to make wrongs right. In his essay entitled “Landscape as an
Ecologically Revealing Language,” Robert Thayer writes that responsible ecological design
should go further than making an artistic statement:
“Art may be content only to comment on unstable, unsustainable, or consumptive conditions; responsible design should remedy them. This dimension of healing – the deliberate manifestation of a normative, corrective process in the landscape – is to me the obvious “end” of a revelatory process. Why diagnose if not to cure? Why reveal if not ultimately to heal?” (Thayer 118)
Robert France agrees that art and design cannot heal ecosystems without science. His
belief that the two entities must be combined to foster positive change is evident in the following
excerpt:
“…neither art and design nor science and engineering alone have done much to instill love and motivate action for the natural world. No one would be inspired by a sterile engineered waterway (like the LA river) to protect other rivers, just as no one would become dedicated to preserving rainforests because they contemplated a tree clipped to look like a giant puppy.” (France “Green” 35)
France feels that landscape architecture can be an effective means of sustaining nature if a
marriage exists between “the feeling of art and the knowing of science”(35) He sees this in
32 recent storm water and wetland projects where art and science, beauty and ecological function, environmental management and ecotourism are synthesized successfully. France welcomes the trend towards multi-functional wetland parks where education, water management, and wildlife habitat are all equally important; and no element dominates at the expense of others. “Functional art lies at the success of ecologically sustainable designs that will inspire action beyond the bounds of the site.” (36)
Projects
In seeking current examples of good ecological design, I felt it necessary to narrow the search by looking for specific qualities. First, does the project protect or improve the ecological health of the site? Second, does the project address more than one design issue successfully?
And, third, does the project communicate this information to its users creatively and effectively?
All four of the following projects meet these criteria. The first two projects are water treatment facilities and the last two are stream restoration/greenway projects. Each is an interesting and unique mix of science, art, and storytelling.
1) Water Pollution Control Laboratory, Landscape Design – Portland, Oregon
Client: City of Portland’s Bureau of Environmental Services
Architects: Miller Hull Partnership – Seattle, Washington; SERA Architects – Portland, Oregon
Landscape Design: Murase Associates – Portland, Oregon
The Water Pollution Control Lab in Portland was completed in February 1997 and is now a city landmark. Here, Portland’s water quality is monitored and people are educated about “the use of natural systems to mitigate pollutants from storm water runoff.” (Murase Associates) The lab itself conducts full-service analysis of water, soil, sediment and sludge for the city’s
33 environmental monitoring projects. Storm water, sewage, surface water from local creeks, and groundwater are all monitored, as well as the water after it is treated and reused.
Murase Associates created an ecologically sensitive landscape design for 6.5 acres of the
7.6 acre site along 900 linear feet of the Willamette River. Storm water is directed to a detention pond through a flume (Figure 1) where sedimentation and biofiltration naturally occur thanks to a variety of aquatic and emergent plant material. Bioswales also help to mitigate the storm water.
The river bank has been stabilized with bioengineering practices and the industrial debris and pollution has been removed. (Portland Bureau of Environmental Services)
This site contains interpretive and educational signage and is connected by a series of paths to neighboring Cathedral Park and the surrounding community. A sculpture celebrating the importance of water by Don Merkt is displayed along a public path that stretches along the river. A pier overlooking the detention pond brings people further into the site to see water quality improvement at work. To date the project has won 14 awards for building/site design and energy efficiency. (Portland Bureau of Environmental Services)
2) Waterworks Gardens – Renton, Washington
Client: King County South Treatment Plant
Artist: Lorna Jordan
Landscape Architect: Jones & Jones Architects and Landscape Architects Ltd.
Consulting Engineer: Brown and Caldwell --Walnut Creek, CA
Waterworks Gardens, opened in 1996, is an eight acre public park adjacent to King
County’s South Treatment Plant. Here, a network of eleven ponds and enhanced wetlands filter then clean storm water running off from fifty acres of the treatment plant’s paved surfaces
(Figure 2). The gardens were designed to comply with state and county rules and are so
34 successful at cleaning the water that King County received a permit to discharge it into
Springbrook Creek. The park is designed to handle a peak twenty-four hour, two-year storm. A pump recirculates the water from the last pond back to the first one helping to avoid stagnation, prevent ice build up, minimize mosquitoes, and provide a constant flow through the water features. (Blankenship)
In addition to the scientific aspects, Waterworks Gardens “is a place where art, technology, and nature join in a unique way.”(Department of Natural Resources and Parks)
Artist Lorna Jordan designed the park as a series of garden rooms that together resemble a large flowering plant (Figure 3). The path, or Water Walk, begins in what is called the Knoll which represents the plant’s root, then passes through leaf-shaped ponds to a mosaic grotto which resembles a sprouting seedpod. Circular ponds after the grotto symbolize the fruit, while several wetlands make up the flower. Even the planting scheme is symbolic in that the plants used where the water is still contaminated are species known to Native Americans as bad omens. The path parallels the treatment course of the water from where it enters metal grates to the wetlands, and connects the park to two adjacent cities. (Blankenship)
The idea for this park originated when artist Lorna Jordan was asked by process control supervisor Richard Butler to “dress up” an addition to the plant. Jordan “had no interest in simply plopping down some public art.” She was on a mission to “help people reconnect with the systems that sustain them.” (Blankenship) She felt in order to do this, the infrastructure of the water treatment plant should be made more accessible to the public, and also be more beautiful.
After the initial design phase, Jordan involved landscape architects and environmental engineers to complete the project. This is a truly innovative park that creatively fuses storm water
35 treatment and art. (Blankenship) Waterworks Gardens has won several awards including the
1996 Outstanding Local Civil Engineering Award and the 1998 Place Design Award.
3) Prince Memorial Greenway -- Santa Rosa, California
Client: City of Santa Rosa
Architect/Landscape Architects: RRM Design Group – San Luis Obispo, California
Civil Engineers: Carlile-Macy Engineers
Geotechnical Engineer: Kleinfelder, Inc.
Structural Engineers: Winzler & Kelly
Ecology: Golden Bear Biostudios
Hydrology: Phil Williams & Associates
Citizens concerned with the state of the Santa Rosa Creek sparked the revitalization of it in 1989. Degradation of the creek began in the 1960s when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers &
Soil Conservation Service channeled half of the thirteen miles of it for fear of downtown being flooded (Figure 4 and 5). In doing so, the aesthetic quality of Santa Rosa Creek was compromised as well as native fish populations (including the endangered steelhead trout). The
concrete floor and walls of the stream caused the shallow water to reach temperatures over 80
degrees, too hot for the fish to survive. (Viani 42, 44)
RRM Design Group – as part of a team of civil, geotechnical, and structural engineers,
ecologists, hydrologists, environmental planners – were hired to help find funding for the project
as well as to design landscape and recreational features. The Prince Memorial Greenway, a 1.2
mile-long path along the Santa Rosa Creek, was designed to connect the downtown area to
existing bikeways and commercial sites. An important part of this project was creek restoration
which involved jack hammering the sides and bottom of the creek to create a deeper and
36 narrower channel. In doing so, underground diesel and heavy fuel oil tanks from 1920s-30s were
found as well as rubble from a 1930’s earthquake. Even though toxic clean up doubled the
estimated cost of the project, no one involved seems to regret restoring Santa Rosa Creek.
RRM found that in order to make this project successful, they “needed to get people
down to the creek; we needed their eyes and ears on it.” (Viani 45) Converting industrial
facilities into restaurants and shops facing the water would attract bicyclists and pedestrians,
while benches, plazas, paths, and art would draw them even closer to the water. In summer of
2001, a nonprofit organization called ArtStart brought in six high school students to create a
mural that would relate to the site, make an environmental statement, and would tell something
about the history of Santa Rosa. They came up with an image of a steelhead trout breaking through a concrete barrier which would symbolize a breakthrough for the city, for the fish, and for the students themselves (Figure 6).
Due to the success of the Santa Rosa Creek Restoration Project, the Army Corps plans to restore yet another section they had channeled in the 1960s. Bill Cox from the California
Department of Fish and Game says “this project will have major benefits over the next many years as people become more aware of and tuned in to the stream. They’ve taken the stream out
of the back alley and put it in the front yard.” (Viani 48)
The Prince Memorial Greenway/Santa Rosa Creek Restoration Project was awarded the
2001 Planning Project Award by the California Chapter of the American Planning Association.
4) Ohlone Greenway/ Codornices Creek Restoration – Berkeley, California
The Olhone Greenway is a walking, biking, and in-line skating trail that stretches the
entire length of the city of El Cerrito, California from Berkeley to Richmond. It is located
37 underneath the BART, or the Bay Area Rapid Transit structure, and connects many community
parks and gardens.
There have been many riparian restoration projects along this greenway thanks to several
groups including the Friends of Five Creeks, a volunteer group affiliated with the Urban Creeks
Council of California. The FFC is dedicated to protecting and restoring watersheds and aquatic
and riparian habitat of five local creeks. Codornices Creek in Berkeley is one of these creeks and
“may well become one of the premier models for urban creek restoration” with its history of
successful restoration efforts (Urban Creeks Council of California). Building on past
daylighting, bank stabilization, and trail construction projects, a new watershed restoration action plan will further improve Codornices Creek. Plans include removing barriers to fish migration,
restoring wildlife habitat throughout the creek corridor, removal of invasive exotic species and
re-vegetating with native plants (Figure 7), creating a water quality monitoring program, and
protecting endangered species such as the threatened steelhead trout. (Urban Creeks Council of
California)
Public art is also a major component of many Ohlone Greenway projects. Steel
sculptures of quail (Codornice is Spanish for “quail”) are perched on new bridge railings over
Codornices Creek (Figure 8). An exhibit featuring art installations, interpretive signs, and a
native plant restoration was installed in 1992 along the Westbrae section of the greenway, to “tell
the many-layered stories of the place and its inhabitants in a lively and engaging manner.”
(Berkeley Partners for Parks) California’s agricultural period in history is represented by steel
sculptures of cows (Figure 9) surrounded by old tractor seats. A seventy-two foot long mural
painted on a wall supporting the BART rails depicts the evolution of transportation systems from
pre-settlement times to the present. (Berkeley Partners for Parks)
38 In recent news, an interpretive natural and cultural history exhibit was dedicated on the
Ohlone Greenway in North Berkeley on October 10, 2004. The Ohlone Peoples’ Exhibit features sculptural objects and native plantings that represent aspects of early Ohlone life before
European migration to the area. A sculptural bench displays traditional basket weaving patterns, and steel grizzly bears are being built to commemorate the past abundance of wildlife. Native plantings help tell the story of how the Ohlone People used them for food and making tools.
Storyboard panels are also being created that will illustrate a brief history of these Native
Americans, and will be permanent features of the greenway. (City of Berkeley)
Summary
All four case studies share certain goals, yet each is unique in the way the goals are met.
The Stormwater Gardens in Portland employ a mix of highly scientific technology and functional landscape features to remove runoff water “from the shadowy realm of catch basins and pipes and renders it a visible component of the landscape.” (Thompson and Sorvig 17) Local sculptures are featured, while paths and educational signage are provided for the public. Storm water management is visible in Renton’s Waterworks as well, yet environmental art is taken a step further than displayed sculpture. Here, art is part of everything from the symbolic use of plant species to the flower-like master plan. The Prince Memorial Greenway also incorporates art and technology into its restoration of Santa Rosa Creek. Here, the goals of revitalizing native fish populations and reconnecting people with the creek are met by physically restoring the previously channeled stream and building pedestrian paths close to the water. Paintings done by local high school students convey environmental and historic information and help to tell the story of Santa Rosa Creek. Finally, the Ohlone Greenway showcases a variety of revitalization projects including creek restorations, art installations, and educational exhibits. This greenway
39 connects people with their local waterways, with public gardens and parks, with Ohlone history, and with other people in their community.
40
Figure 1 - Flume at Portland’s Stormwater Gardens (Scott Murase)
Figure 2 - Paths through wetlands and ponds at Renton, Washington’s Waterworks Gardens (Ned Ahrens)
41
Figure 3 - Aerial view of Waterworks Gardens during construction (Ned Ahrens)
Figure 4 - Santa Rosa Creek before restoration Figure 5 - Santa Rosa Creek after restoration (Frank Kasimov) (Mike Sheppard)
42
Figure 6 - Painting of Steelhead Trout breaking through a concrete barrier (Mike Sheppard)
Figure 7 - Volunteers planting natives along Codornices Creek (Friends of Five Creeks)
43
Figure 8 - Quail sculptures on Ohlone Greenway (Friends of Five Creeks)
Figure 9 - Metal cow sculpture (Berkeley Partners for Parks)
44
CHAPTER 5
THE PROJECT SITE
“Here they all learned to swim, an accomplishment which every boy in Athens acquired
at an early age. This pool continued to be the delightful resort of the small fry until destroyed by
the blasting for the waterway for the cotton mill.” - Augustus Longstreet Hull (Hull 78)
Introduction
This chapter contains five sections that are meant to acquaint the reader with the project
site and the opportunities and constraints for greenway development. First, a brief evolution of
the Oconee Rivers Greenway is described, from its inception to its current status. Second, the
project site location is identified and existing conditions are documented with written accounts
and photographs. Third, the story of Easley’s Mill is told including historic descriptions of the
Shoals and the establishment of the University of Georgia and the town of Athens. Fourth, the
habitats and flora of granite outcrops are described, demonstrating the ecological significance of
these unique ecosystems. Finally, known needs and constraints of the site are recognized such as
SPLOST requests and utility easements.
Oconee Rivers Greenway: A Brief History
Charles Aguar, former Professor of Landscape Architecture at the University of Georgia, envisioned a greenway for Athens over thirty years ago. His wife, Berdeana Aguar, recalls
Charlie proposing ideas for what is now the Oconee River Greenway and Heritage Trail in 1973.
45 "He started talking to all the garden clubs in the area and started pushing it," she said. (Hammes)
First-phase groundbreaking for these trails didn’t begin until November 1999, almost thirty years
after Charlie envisioned it, and only a few months before he died. "It's common knowledge that
Charlie Aguar is the father of our Greenway system in Athens-Clarke County," said Richard C.
Field, member of the Oconee River Greenway Commission and former Chair. “What we have
now is his vision.”(Hammes)
In 1975, Charlie Aguar and a group of ten others founded the Sandy Creek Nature Center
(see Appendix B for list of founding members). Sandy Creek Park was later established. Cook’s
Trail, a 4.1 mile footpath with bridges and boardwalks, connects the nature center to the park and
officially opened for public use on December 8, 1990. It was built over the course of three years
by volunteers including former UGA Professor Walter Cook, for whom the trail is named.
(“Sandy”)
Another grassroots movement beginning in the 1970s led to the creation of the Oconee
Rivers Greenway Commission, a secondary agency of the Athens-Clarke County Unified
Government formalized by county ordinance in 1992. As stated on the Oconee Rivers Greenway
Commission’s brochure, their mission is:
“To protect the Oconee Rivers and insure the long-term integrity, natural beauty and life support functions of the rivers; to provide citizens the opportunity to enjoy healthy river-oriented recreational activities; to develop an economically viable plan for a Greenway system based on sound environmental principles; and to assist in the implementation of the plan.”
The responsibilities of this advisory committee include developing a plan for a river- oriented greenway system in Athens Clarke County and also recommending additional ways to protect the Oconee Rivers and their tributaries. The ORGC has successfully lobbied for 100 foot river and 75 foot perennial stream buffers and has persuaded the county to adopt a community
46 greenspace program. This group continues to guide the development of two pilot programs, the
Heritage Trail and the North Oconee River Greenway, as part of a countywide greenway
network plan. (The Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission)
The Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission sought the talents of local landscape
architecture firm Robinson Fisher Associates in drafting a concept plant for the entire river.
Fisher presented design ideas for greenway development to the Athens community in December
1996. The plan included a 10 foot multi-purpose path with buffers and conservation strips along
both sides of the river. Fisher believed that the greenway would help to destroy the myth that
outdoor recreation only happens far from home. “There are 10,000 people living within a five-
minute walk of the river,” he said. (McCarthy)
While many Athens residents strongly supported greenway plans, some riverfront
property owners vehemently opposed having a public path built literally in their back yards.
Safety and loss of privacy were among the major concerns of those in opposition. In an article
published January 1, 1997 in the Athens Observer, Athens resident Ed Mingledorff made his
opinion known on the front steps of the Athens Daily News building carrying his shotgun and pistol. He was “mad as hell about it” when he discovered surveyor stakes on his property and
assumed they were associated with greenway construction. The only way he would allow
greenway development on his property was if his entire lot was purchased for $1 million. Later
that same month, another Athens Observer article stated that construction for the east side
greenway trail had been postponed due to a high volume of opposition.
Despite setbacks like these and many other unforeseen disruptions, the Oconee River
Greenway in Athens has made remarkable progress over the last six years. Several important
things happened in 1999: project ownership shifted from ORGC to Athens-Clarke County,
47 construction of the Heritage Trail and the North Oconee River Greenway began, and a greenway coordinator position was created by the Department of Leisure Services. (Oconee Rivers
Greenway Commission 1999 Annual Report) Since then, Phase I of the North Oconee River
Greenway has been completed including the Willow Street Trail and the Sandy Creek Connector at Sandy Creek Bridge. The multi-use concrete path is approximately 10 foot wide and three miles long. It connects to Cook’s Trail at Sandy Creek Nature Center and follows the North
Oconee River south towards downtown Athens and UGA. Several sections of the Heritage Trail,
a component of the North Oconee River Greenway, have been completed including the Dudley
Park/Oconee Street Trail, the Chicopee Interpretive Center, and three bridges over the North
Oconee River and connecting creeks (Figure 10). The Williams Street Connector is complete
except for interpretive sign installation, and additional funding for the Easley’s Mill section, the
focus of this thesis project, is still pending. The Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission has
submitted a monetary request “for easement acquisition and possible land purchase along the
East side of the North Oconee River from Oconee Street to the University of Georgia East
Campus Village.” (SPLOST 2005 Project Request Form) The SPLOST IV request has passed
including a description of a North Oconee River Greenway Project. Robinson Fisher Associates
remains the primary design consultant for all Heritage Trail and North Oconee River Greenway
Trail Projects. (SPLOST IV Progress Report)
Project Location and Existing Conditions
The design application of this thesis takes place on the Easley’s Mill site as referred to in
the SPLOST 2005 Request Form. Although a plan for the entire section from Oconee Street to
UGA East Campus Village has been requested, this project addresses a small but very important
segment of it. There are several challenging issues involved on this site including the
48 management of both historic and ecological resources. I will now describe these elements from
Oconee Street to the second island in the river, approximately 800 feet to the south. Please refer
to the aerial photograph (Figure 11) and the images that follow it (Figure 12 illustrates current
property ownership).
The Greenway’s Oconee Street entrance has a one-way circular drive with seven parking
spaces. The Salvation Army occupied a building that stood here before Athens-Clarke County
purchased the lot in 2000. A large stone sign bearing the Greenway symbol stands in the grassy
area between the road and the parking (Figure 13). There are some garbage cans, a small
informational kiosk, and a yellow metal gate on the south edge of the parking. The elevation is
612 feet.
Just past the gate is what appears to be a worn utility driveway over a granite outcrop
(Figure 14). Fill dirt and asphalt cover the rock outcrop in some places (Figure 15). To the west of the driveway there is a gradual drop in elevation of 10-12 feet. At the base of the slope the
vegetation is very thick with Rubus allegheniensis (Blackberry), patches of Rhus sp. (Sumac), and a mix of native and exotic tree seedlings, grasses, and herbaceous plants.
A portion of the city’s sanitary sewer system runs along the river. Cast-iron sewer pipes run underground near the river and the utility easement is kept clear for maintenance reasons
(Figure 16). Following this mown path further south, the sound of rushing water becomes louder as one approaches Easley’s Mill site. The historic significance of this site is discussed in the next section. In the clearing under the power line that spans the river stands a large stone wall, presumably part of the former dam, with a steep drop on its south side (Figure 17). Looking north from on top of the wall, one will see white, fast-moving water cascading over rocks and rubble (Figure 18). Apartments are visible on the other side of the river, although they are
49 partially screened by a wooded island in the middle of the river (Figure 19). The rapids continue south of the wall, and then flatten out before reaching a second wooded island (Figure 20).
Below the stone wall is a flat, low area along the bank with patches of native Chasmanthium latifolium (River Oats) close to the water (Figure 21). There are also thick stands of invasive exotics Ligustrum sinense (Chinese Privet) and Lonicera japonica (Japanese Honeysuckle).
On the east side of the mown utility easement in the same general location of the wall is a large open granite outcrop. The area uphill from the outcrop appears to have been backfilled and converted to a grass play area with a wooden retaining wall holding the soil (Figure 22). There is playground equipment and a covered picnic shelter above the wall (Figure 24). A wooden amphitheater, dedicated to Tommy Harris October 10, 1991, sits on the outcrop below the retaining wall with the stage facing east (Figure 23). Another open wooden structure with a metal roof has been built south of the amphitheater in the wooded edge surrounding the outcrop
(Figure 25). Lichens, mosses, and other species typical of a granite outcrop community are present. However, the wooded edges of the outcrop are dominated by invasive exotic species including Ligustrum sinense (Chinese Privet), Lonicera japonica (Japanese Honeysuckle), and
Albizia julibrissin (Mimosa).
Georgia Power transmission poles and lines run through the center of the entire project site, then southwest across the river (Figure 11). The bank of the river along this entire site is wooded except for the area cleared under the power lines. Native tree species identified by the author in this zone include:
Acer negundo Box Elder
Acer rubrum Red Maple
Acer saccharinum Silver Maple
50 Betula nigra River Birch
Carpinus caroliniana American Hornbeam
Cercis Canadensis Eastern Redbud
Maclura pomifera Osageorange
Ostrya virginiana American Hophornbeam
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore
Quercus nigra Water Oak
Quercus phellos Willow Oak
Invasive exotic species of trees, shrubs, and vines identified by the author in this zone include:
Albizia julibrissin Mimosa
Ailanthus altissima Tree of Heaven
Broussonetia papyrifera Paper Mulberry
Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian Olive
Ligustrum sinense Chinese Privet
Lonicera japonica Japanese Honeysuckle
Morus alba White Mulberry
Pureraria lobata Kudzu
Also seen in the wooded areas along the river bank are several homeless camps. Some campsites appear relatively elaborate complete with tents, make-shift kitchens, laundry lines, and stacked firewood. These campsites appear to change frequently. Some expand and some disappear leaving trash and other items behind (Figure 26).
51 Easley’s Mill: The Beginning of Athens and the University of Georgia
“Georgia removed all the Cherokee Indians from her soil in the year 1738.” (Rowe 3)
The Cherokee and the Creek inhabited the Athens area before white settlement and were informally divided by the “east-west line running between what are now Athens and
Watkinsville.” (Hynds 1) Ownership shifted to the white settlers after seven treaties with the tribes and Franklin County was formed. In February of 1796, Jackson County was created out of
Franklin County “provided that the courts and elections be held at the home of Daniel W. Easley, one of the commissioners, until a courthouse could be erected.” (Hynds 3)
Daniel Easley was a Revolutionary soldier who owned a great deal of land on both sides of the Oconee River. Records show that the land was granted to him by the State of Georgia in
1800, but some speculate there was an earlier grant. (Rowe 3) In 1801, Easley was operating flour, saw, and grist mills at a place called Cedar Shoals on the North Oconee.
In the summer of 1801, a committee chartered by the State Legislature in 1795, visited
Easley’s land while searching for an appropriate site to build a university. John Milledge,
Abram Baldwin, George Walton, John Twiggs, and Hugh Lawson met at Billups’ Tavern on
Lexington Road and proceeded to scout out Cedar Shoals. “The committee was so pleased with the location, then a forest of grand oaks,” that they decided on it for the University of Georgia.
(Rowe 3) An article published July 20, 1801 in The Augusta Chronicle describes this event:
“the Committee repaired to the county of Jackson and proceeded with attention and deliberation to examine a number of situations as well upon the tracts belonging to the University as upon others of private individuals. Having completed their views, they proceeded by ballot to make the choice, when the vote was unanimous in favor of a place belonging to Mr. Daniel Easley, at the Cedar Shoals, upon the North Fork of the Oconee River, and the same was resolved to be selected and chosen for the seat of the University of Georgia. For this purpose, the tract containing 633 acres was purchased of Mr. Easley by Mr. Milledge, one of the Committee, and made a donation of the Trustees, and it was called Athens.” (Hull 1)
52
The University of Georgia was built on the South side of the river, about a half mile
upslope from Easley’s Mill, and the town of Athens soon began to grow around it. (Hull 2) The
lack of facilities and equipment was quite a problem in the early days of UGA, so the legislature
loaned $5000 to the University in November of 1802 to erect several buildings. In 1803
Classes were moved into a “one and a half story, twenty-foot square building constructed for that
purpose by Daniel W. Easley for $187.” (Hynds 69) Easley later built the Athens Grammar
School in 1804 for $1,000 and a house for Josiah Meigs, the first President of the University of
Georgia. (Hynds 8, 82)
There are many theories as to why the Committee chose Easley’s land for the college.
John Milledge’s generosity and the natural beauty of Cedar Shoals are considered highly probable reasons. President Meigs once described the area as windy and pleasant and “if there is a healthy and beautiful spot in Georgia this is one.” (Hynds 4) There were several freshwater
springs above the river and fish, shad in particular, were plentiful. According to Augustus
Longstreet Hull, Easley once grew a small crop of cotton at the shoals and fondly recalls this
river landscape:
“I am reminded, by the speaking of Easley’s cotton patch on the river, of the most beautiful place for small boys to bathe and learn to swim was ever made. It was just below the site of the factory, and seemed to be made for the purpose. It was between the bank of the river and a small island, and was about fifty yards long, and in no place more than four feet deep, with a smooth sandy bottom, and was made by a ledge of rocks which extended from the bank to the island at its lower end. It was perfectly secluded, and the limbs of the large trees that grew on the banks almost met over the pool. The greater portion of the ledge was above the water and made a dry, clean table for the boys to undress. Here they all learned to swim, an accomplishment which every boy in Athens acquired at an early age. This pool continued to be the delightful resort of the small fry until destroyed by the blasting for the waterway for the cotton mill.” (78)
53 In 1832, William Dearing, John Nisbet, Augustin Clayton, and Abram Walker bought 55
acres including Easley’s mill complex for $8,000. Here, Athens’ second large textile plant was
built called the Athens Manufacturing Company (the first being the Georgia Factory at
Whitehall) and was in operation by late summer of 1833. (De Vorsey 43)
Currently, the site where Easley’s Mill once stood belongs to Athens Boys and Girls Club
on the East side of the North Oconee River, and Athens Manufacturing Company, LLC owns the
West side. Part of the dam and a few remnants of brick mill structures still stand today, while an
original brick building once housed a bar called O’Malley’s, a health club, and is now leased by
Dial America (Figures 27 and 28).
Ecological Significance of Granite Outcrops
There are over 36,000 square feet of visible granite outcrop on this project site, and the
amount covered by fill is unknown. Granite outcrops, also called flatrocks, occur in the
Piedmont from North Carolina to eastern Alabama with the largest concentration existing
between Atlanta and Athens, Georgia. They usually share the same slope as the surrounding
hillsides and their surfaces are generally smooth with scattered islands of vegetation. The plants
living on these outcrops have evolved to survive harsh environmental conditions including
“extreme temperatures, drought, intense light, strong winds, erosion, fire, and shallow soils”.
(Popp 34) Because of this harsh environment, invading species from surrounding wooded areas cannot survive on the outcrops. Likewise, outcrop species cannot compete with those found in
neighboring plant communities. Therefore, plant species of granite outcrops are quite specialized
and unique and should therefore be protected and restored as needed. (Popp 41)
In a healthy outcrop community there are six different plant habitats: bare rock, crevices
in the rock, marginal zone, rock rubble, solution pits, and vegetative mats. (Popp 36)
54 Approximately two hundred plant species of lichens, mosses, annuals, perennials, and woody plants depend on these habitats to survive. Forty-four of these species are considered typical of an outcrop, and seventeen of the forty-four are regarded as common (see Appendix C for list of endemic species). (Popp 42)
Opportunities and Constraints at the Project Site
According to the Athens Clarke County SPLOST (Special Purpose Local Options Sales
Tax) 2005 Project Request Form, there are two specific goals and eight desired features listed for what is called Greenway Project 1, or the Oconee Street - East Campus Village Greenway. The project site of this thesis has been identified as approximately the first 800 linear feet of this section. The goals for the entire section include an extension of the existing Greenway that will make a riverside connection from Oconee Street to UGA’s East Campus Village and College
Station Road. This is intended to provide a ‘blue’ trail for canoes and kayaks from the Easley’s
Mill site to Whitehall. Desired features for this section as stated in the SPLOST 2005 form are as follows:
1. Approximately 1.5 miles of improved trail (12’ width) along the east side of North Oconee River from Oconee Street Greenway parking area to UGA’s East Campus Village. 2. Restroom facilities near the Oconee St. Greenway parking area. 3. Canoe and kayak launching site below the former Easley Mill (River Mill). 4. Overlook and associated side trails for river view and rock outcrop display and protection. 5. Expanded parking at Oconee Street Greenway parking area. 6. Canoe/kayak landing site at the Whitehall Road Bridge over the North Oconee River. 7. Exhibits and interpretive areas to complete Bartram Area, Trail Ecology, Dudley Park, and Shoals Zones of existing Heritage Trail. 8. Design and planning for the next phase of the Greenway network on the North Oconee River.
55 The presence of sewer pipes and power transmission poles and lines was described earlier in this chapter. There are many regulations and limitations associated with public utilities regarding what is allowed or prohibited within each right-of-way.
The mown sewer line easement provides a logical location for the proposed greenway trail. It is already cleared and relatively flat, meaning there will be a minimal amount of grading or clearing needed. It is close enough to the river for nice views, yet far enough away from the
water to allow space for an adequate vegetative buffer. For sewer maintenance and repair reasons, the trail may not run directly above the sewer lines, but it could run along side them instead. Plans to replace sewer lines on this site are underway and construction is scheduled to
take place within the 2005-2007 period. (ACC Capitol Improvements Element) Any future
greenway development should be coordinated with these efforts.
As seen in the aerial photograph (Figure 11), power transmission poles and lines are
present on this project site. According to Rick Boswell, Engineering Supervisor at Georgia
Power, it is their main goal to preserve the integrity of the power lines. According to Joel W.
Johnson, with the Athens Transmission Center of Georgia Power, these particular lines serve the
North Athens Substation and require a 100’ right-of-way. The following are not allowed within
this right-of-way: permanent structures, large growth trees over 15’ tall, street lights, parking
areas that restrict Georgia Power access, and septic fields or tanks. Roads may be built that cross
the lines perpendicularly, but cannot run parallel to the lines within the right-of-way. Each
transmission pole has an underground grid at its base called a “ground field.” Consequently,
grading is not allowed within 25’of any pole and should not exceed a 3:1 slope elsewhere in the
R.O.W. An encroachment permit from Georgia Power is required before any construction
begins in a power line R.O.W. (Boswell) (Johnson)
56 Summary
This project site will be a valuable addition to the Oconee River Greenway system due to its rich cultural history and unique landscapes. The stories of Athens’ first settlement, industrial
past, and establishment of UGA make the Easley’s Mill site an ideal stop along the Heritage
Trail. The presence of two granite outcrops provides a rare opportunity to simultaneously restore
a specialized ecosystem and educate the public about their ecological significance. With careful consideration of the sewer and power easement limitations, a comprehensive greenway plan based on sound ecological principles can insure the protection, improvement, and public enjoyment of this special place.
57 D C A E
B
A Willow Street Trail D Chicopee Interpretive Center Figure 10 Map of North Oconee Sandy Creek Connector B E Williams Street Connector River Greenway C Dudley Park/Oconee Street Trail Proposed Project Location 58 Playground Dudley Park Covered picnic area
Covered Large Granite structure Outcrop Oconee Street Parking Area Tommy Harris Amphitheater
Small Granite LEGEND Outcrop
Power Line R.O.W.
Sewer Line Oconee Street Bridge 100 yr Flood Zone
Site of former NORTH OCONEE RIVER 500 yr Flood Zone Easley’s Mill and dam
Historic building now Dial America NORTH
scale: 1”=100’ - 0”
Figure 11 Project Site Existing Conditions 59 LEGEND
Athens Boys & Girls Club
Athens Clarke County
Action Inc.
Athens Mfg. Co.
Summerglen Assoc. NORTH OCONEE RIVER Oconee Hill Cemetery
(2’ contours)
NORTH
scale: 1”=100’ - 0”
Figure 12 Current Ownership 60
Figure 13 - Existing sign in Oconee Street Parking Area
Figure 14 - Utility access drive into greenway site over granite outcrop
61
Figure 15 - Asphalt on granite outcrop
Figure 16 - Mown utility easement looking south (David Porter)
62
Figure 17 - Historic stone and brick wall
Figure 18 - View of rapids looking north from wall (David Porter)
63
Figure 19 - View west across the North Oconee River, John Devine standing on top of the wall (David Porter)
Figure 20 - View south below rapids (David Porter)
64
Figure 21 - River Oats, Chasmanthium latifolium, on the bank of The North Oconee River (David Porter)
Figure 22 - Retaining wall on granite outcrop
65
Figure 23 - Tommy Harris Amphitheater below retaining wall (David Porter)
Figure 24 - Covered structure and playground above retaining wall
66
Figure 25 - Covered structure on south edge of granite outcrop
Figure 26 - Homeless camp (David Porter)
67
Figure 27 - Athens Factory ca. 1890 (Rare Books and Manuscripts, UGA Libraries)
Figure 28 - Dial America building and mill race October 30, 2004 (David Porter)
68
CHAPTER 6
DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
“When we walk, we naturally go to the fields and woods: what would become of us, if we
walked only in a garden or a mall?”-- Henry David Thoreau
Introduction
This chapter applies the insight gained from the research described in earlier chapters as
it applies to the project site, a portion of the Oconee River Greenway in Athens-Clarke County.
The ecological design criteria identified in Chapter 3 are reiterated as a prelude to the concept plan developed in response to these criteria. Each major design element of the concept plan is then discussed in greater detail as to how the criteria are met regarding installation, the use of materials, and management practices. Design elements include plans for the Oconee Street parking area, the North Oconee River Greenway trail, Easley’s Mill Overlook, a vegetation management plan, and an educational component plan. Illustrative drawings and other images that further describe the design plans are located at the end of this chapter.
This application portion of the thesis contains a series of design recommendations rather
than specific detailed design plans. It is meant to provide conceptual guidelines for future
development of the next leg of the North Oconee River Greenway.
Ecological Design Criteria
Three criteria were established to enable development of a concept plan based on an
appropriate ecological premise. First, all design recommendations are geared towards protecting
69 and improving the quality of the North Oconee River. Second, all recommendations regarding
vegetation management focus on increasing species and habitat diversity. And third, all negative
impacts associated with development on this site are kept to a minimum. To insure that the criteria are met, three rules based on ecological design principles were followed in developing this plan: to recognize the interconnectedness of everything on site, to design with nature by looking to it for inspiration, and to balance the ecological needs of the site with those of its
human users.
Concept Plan
Using these criteria and principles as guidelines, I have produced a concept plan that will improve the environmental and aesthetic quality of the site while offering recreational and
educational opportunities. For orientation to the site and location of specific design elements,
see the concept plan (Figure 29). The major design components on this plan are: an expanded parking area with restroom facilities, greenway trail placement, a plaza and overlook at the
Easley’s Mill site, boat launch placement, and vegetation management zones. Appropriate locations for educational signage or displays are also marked, as are possible future greenway connections and spur trails. Each of these components meets the defined ecological design criteria which are described in greater detail below.
Oconee Street Parking Area
The proposed parking area expands upon the existing driveway and parking area,
increasing the number of parking spaces from seven to twenty-four. There is a mix of large (10x
20’), compact (8 1/2x 18’0’), and disabled (12 x 20’) parking spaces and a drop-off/pick-up zone
near the greenway entrance for disabled users. (Flink 242) Space for canoe/kayak loading and
unloading is also provided near the trail entrance. A 20 x 25’ building sited outside of the power
70 line right-of-way offers restroom facilities, water fountains, and an information kiosk. Next to
the building, a semi-circular stone seat wall is proposed, similar in style to existing stone walls on other parts of the greenway. This wall offers a convenient gathering or resting place near the
parking and facilities while blocking vehicular access to an existing path through a granite
outcrop. Restoration of the outcrop is proposed and will require restricted access. This is
explained in the Vegetation Management section of this chapter.
The driveway will remain one-way, but the exit will be shifted to meet Oconee Street at a
safer angle, closer to the ideal of ninety degrees. Installing a porous driving surface like gravel with an appropriate sized underbase will slow traffic and minimize storm water runoff. Porous pavement also reduces runoff by allowing the water to absorb into the ground where it falls. If it is decided that the driveway must be paved with impervious materials, then storm water runoff leaving the driveway for release into the river nearby will be reduced by following the other recommendations offered below. The parking bays will be permeable (gravel or porous pavement) to help infiltrate rainwater. Since disabled parking spaces and loading zones require hard surfaces for safety reasons, these will be surfaced with a paving material that is smooth and stable (i.e. not gravel) whether permeable or not. (Flink 242)
The entire proposed parking area can be accommodated by the existing grade. This will minimize erosion during construction. Vegetated shoulders around the parking area will absorb and filter runoff. This will eliminate any need for storm inlets, drains, or concrete curbs and gutters. Native plants will be installed to visually soften the appearance of the parking lot and help to screen it from Oconee Street. Installation and maintenance of these plantings is discussed in the Vegetation Management section of this chapter. Due to the power line right-of-way
restrictions, it is not possible to plant many tall trees to shade this area. One medium-sized
71 Scarlet Oak is placed where it will not obstruct the power lines. Otherwise, small trees such as
Redbuds, Shining Sumac, and Eastern Red Cedars are acceptable and will provide shade without interfering with power line maintenance. These species are part of a plant community that is typical of North Georgia’s interstate roadsides and will be attractive to drivers on Oconee
Street/Lexington Highway. See Figure 30 for an enlarged plan of the parking area and plantings, and Figures 31 and 32 for views of the parking area before and after the proposed plantings are installed.
Greenway Trail
A concrete path along the west perimeter of the parking area links the sidewalk on
Oconee Street to the main entrance of this proposed greenway section. By following this path, greenway users will access the new trail without crossing traffic in the parking lot. Originally, access from the parking area to the river area of this site was made by driving or walking over the granite outcrop. I am proposing that the trail be relocated for a couple of reasons. First, since one of the objectives of this project is to restore the granite outcrop, then that area should be avoided. Second, the power line right-of-way prohibits any grading within 25’ of the transmission pole. The slope on either side of the pole is very steep and would require extensive grading to install an A.D.A accessible trail (see Appendix E for A.D.A., Americans with
Disabilities Act, trail requirements). The proposed trail will follow the gentlest slope available.
If installed as shown in Figure 29, some grading will be required to achieve the 6% slope of the path shown. In this case, stabilizing the soil will be of the utmost importance during and after construction to prevent erosion and resulting sedimentation in the river. Alternately, carefully designed switchbacks and retaining walls could be used to install a trail of appropriate grade.
72 Constructing the trail as proposed will require removal of existing vegetation on the west
side of the parking area. The quality of this vegetation is questionable being that much of it
consists of invasive exotic species including Mimosa, Kudzu, Chinese Privet, Japanese
Honeysuckle, and Russian Olive. The few tall Sycamore and Box Elder trees there have been
topped or sheared along one side because of their proximity to the power line right-of-way. If
the existing vegetation is removed for trail construction, this area will be replanted with
vegetation of higher quality including native shrubs and small trees that will not interfere with
power line maintenance (see Appendix J for suggested species list).
From the parking area, the proposed greenway trail leads to a canoe take out/put in
(described later in this chapter) and then runs along the river. I propose that the greenway should
eventually extend north under the Oconee Street bridge and connect to Dudley Park by way of a
cantilevered boardwalk. To the south, the greenway follows the sewer line easement to Easley’s
Mill Overlook, past the second granite outcrop, and ultimately to the University of Georgia’s
East Campus Village. As mentioned in Chapter 5, plans are underway for sewer line repair and
greenway development should be coordinated with these efforts to avoid unnecessary conflicts.
In keeping with existing greenway trails, the proposed greenway will be a 12’ wide
concrete path. Boardwalks or bridges will be incorporated where there is overly wet soil or
abrupt elevation changes. Vehicular access along the greenway will be restricted to Georgia
Power, Athens-Clarke County Public Utilities, and greenway personnel and volunteers working
on the trail. Locked removable bollards will deter unauthorized vehicles. A 2 to 4 foot wide
swath will be kept relatively clear on either side of the trail for vehicular access and safety reasons. Managing the trail edge in this way will also lend a “tidy” appearance to an otherwise
natural landscape that may be considered by some as “too wild.” These strips will be planted
73 with low-growing native vegetation that require infrequent or no mowing such as Carex
Pensylvanica, Pennsylvania Sedge, or Juncus tenuis, Path Rush.
There are two spur trails shown as dashed lines on the concept plan (Figure 29). These will be put in after all other proposed elements are installed. One is a foot path with stairs from the Oconee Street parking lot to the boardwalk connecting this greenway with Dudley Park. The other is a path through the larger granite outcrop to the open air pavilion. This path will be marked with cairn rock piles instead of painted markers on the granite. This trail will not be accessible until educational signage about the sensitivity of the outcrop ecosystem has been installed.
Easley’s Mill Overlook
Just across the proposed greenway trail from the large granite outcrop is a scenic view of the Oconee River and the site of what used to be Easley’s Mill (Figure 19). A historic brick and stone wall provides a platform with a fabulous view of rapids above and below the dam.
However, this is a dangerous place to stand because of steep drops on both sides. A boardwalk with handrails along the north side of the wall will offer visitors a safer opportunity to walk out over the whitewater. A semi-circular stone seat wall will partially enclose a central plaza adjacent to the boardwalk. The plaza will be surfaced with fine gravel or concrete pavers, depending upon the level of formality desired. A wooden ramp connected to the boardwalk will lead down to the area below the wall. This lower space is ideal for picnic tables and for viewing the historic wall (see Figure 35 for an appropriate picnic table example). Canoes and kayaks will be easily carried down the ramp to a put-in below the rapids (described later in this chapter). The surface of the wooden ramp will be amended to prevent slipping. Two concrete paths will
74 connect the plaza and ramp to the greenway trail. One path will connect directly with the ramp
so that boaters can bypass the plaza and avoid negotiating awkward turns (Figure 33).
Educational signs will be installed on the boardwalk to convey the history of this
important site. Their style and materials will be compatible with those already installed in other
areas along the greenway (Figure 36). The juxtaposition of two power sources here (at Easley’s
Mill Overlook on the concept plan Figure 29), historically the dam and currently the power lines
over head, will be used as the topical premise of a sign about local cultural change.
Negative impacts of development in this riverside area are minimized by building the
walking surfaces above the existing features of water, rock, and sudden changes in elevation.
With “floating” boardwalks, grading will be avoided and the amount of impervious surface will
be kept to a minimum. The wood or any other materials used to construct the boardwalk overlook and ramp must not be treated with toxic chemicals that could contaminate the soil or water. Whenever questions regarding the treatment of historic structures arise, these will be resolved through consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, located in Atlanta.
Boat Launches
There are three boat launch/take out sites indicated on the concept plan (Figure 29). The
first is located approximately 250’ above the dam at the base of the trail to the parking lot. This
is considered the primary take out for portaging around the dam and carrying boats to the Oconee
Street parking lot. The second take out is 50’ above the dam and will be used by only by
experienced boaters due to its close proximity to the dam. The third put in is approximately 300’
downriver from the top of the dam. This is accessible by way of the proposed ramp (shown with
an 8.33% slope) from the boardwalk (Figure 33).
75 According to the National Park Service’s design guidelines for canoe and kayak
launches, “a logical, lasting launch provides safe and easy access for paddlers while accommodating the topographic, climatic, and ecological characteristics of its location. Ideally,
its construction is cost-efficient and durable and has little impact on the environment and riparian
ecology.” (“Logical” 5) The proposed boat launch sites are relatively flat areas with no visible
signs of erosion and do not appear to be cut by river currents. This is important for the siting of the put-ins because, according to the National Park Service, areas of heavy flow on a river should
be avoided since strong currents can be dangerous to paddlers and erode the site over time.
Installing low-impact launches (see “General recommendations for designing a launch that is
environment- friendly” in Appendix E) with non-toxic materials will help to protect the water
quality, riparian vegetation, and aquatic habitats while enabling sustainable recreation.
(“Logical” 7)
Average water level information and any applicable environmental regulations will be
investigated before construction documents are drawn so that the specific design is safe. See
Appendix F for general recommendations regarding launch design, and refer to “Logical Lasting
Launches,” a National Park Service publication available in PDF format on the NPS website for
additional information. The fact that these launches are near a historic site may also adjust the
options for techniques and materials used in the construction of the boat launches.
Vegetation Management
There are six vegetation management zones illustrated in Figure 34. For each of these
zones, I am proposing different management goals and strategies based on zone characteristics.
These include moisture and soil conditions, sun exposure, existing plant species, site constraints
(such as power line right-of-way), and aesthetic qualities.
76 Zone A encompasses the plantings in the parking area and at Easley’s Mill Overlook.
This zone is slightly more formal than the other zones and will require frequent maintenance such as watering, mulching and pruning until the plantings becomes established. Large shade trees may not be planted in either area due to the power line right-of-way, so smaller trees and
shrubs are recommended. Suggested species in the parking area are native to the Piedmont region and well adapted to hot dry conditions (see Figure 30 for planting plan). The species selected for the Easley’s Mill Overlook area are also native and adapted to hot and dry conditions, but will tolerate flooding as well (Figure 33). Trees and shrubs should be planted in the fall, mulched, and watered. Watering, mulching, weeding and monitoring over the next few growing seasons will help to insure survival. Grasses and herbaceous plants in Zone A can be planted in the fall or early spring. Since the plantings in this zone are the most formal of all on the project site, selection of 1-gallon containers or plugs for grasses and herbaceous plants is a better option than seeding. In this way, the desired visual outcome will be easier to achieve since plant placement is more predictable. The plants in both areas will require little if any soil amendment or special care to survive. In keeping with the ecological design criteria, no chemical fertilizers or pest controls will be applied.
Zone B includes both granite outcrops on the project site. Since the integrity of both rock
outcrops has been compromised by previous land-uses, their restoration and protection is critical
to the establishment of a nature aesthetic along the greenway. As discussed in Chapter 5, plant
communities of granite outcrops are unique and specialized. Prior to restoration, a complete plant
inventory in these areas will be made and the presence of any rare or endangered species will be
recorded. The smaller rock outcrop has been partially covered with asphalt and currently serves
as a driveway into the site. To begin restoration of this outcrop, the asphalt will be removed,
77 vehicular access will be prohibited, and pedestrian access will be restricted until signs
discouraging trampling are installed. After the signs are posted, and a spur foot path will skirt the western edge of the outcrop and connect with the main greenway trail (Figure 29). For the larger outcrop, the retaining wall and the back-filled soil it supports will be removed. Soil in rock depressions will remain. On a rock outcrop, harsh conditions allow survival of only the toughest plants. These same harsh conditions also cause discomfort for people, especially in the hot months. Consequently, the amphitheater, playground, and covered structure at the top of the slope should be removed. The covered structure on the southern side of the outcrop can remain because it is located in the wooded edge and will not interfere with restoration efforts. The proposed spur trail from the greenway (Figure 29) will eventually lead to this structure through the granite outcrop after signs discouraging trampling are installed. Both spur foot paths will be marked with rock pile cairns or other discreet method. The wooded edge of both outcrops will be managed for invasive exotic removal and soil pockets in the rock will be seeded with appropriate species (see Appendix G for invasive exotic list and Appendix C for native granite outcrop species).
Zone C includes the riparian vegetation along the river bank. As described in Chapter 5,
the shrub layer in this zone is dominated by invasive exotic species. In order to improve the
ecological and aesthetic quality of this vegetative buffer, the exotic species will be eradicated. In
keeping with the ecological design criteria, soil disturbance and chemical use must be kept to a
minimum during this process. However, removal of extensive root systems (such as those
created by Privet) is highly disruptive to the soil community. Consequently, I recommend using
the “cut-treat” method on all woody species. This is described in greater detail in Appendix G.
This method involves cutting a woody plant close to the ground and then painting the base
78 immediately with a glyphosate herbicide. “Cut-treat” is most effective when performed in late
winter and summer, although each time has its advantages. Although the kill is slightly more
effective in the growing season, the absence of leaves in winter makes for more efficient
application. Non-woody herbaceous plants can be removed by hand-pulling when soils are wet.
(Miller 3)
According to James Miller, author of Nonnative Invasive Plants of Southern Forests: A
Field Guide for Identification and Control, “rehabilitation is the most important final phase of an
integrated invasive plant eradication and reclamation program.” (Miller 7) In some cases, native
plant communities may initiate regeneration on their own after invasive removal if the soil seed
bank remains intact. Light-seeded plants, both native and invasive exotic, are likely to be present in the seed bank while heavier seeds will be deposited over time by birds and other animals.
Often times, the native plants in the seed bank do not grow fast enough to out-compete the invasive exotics. For this reason, continuous removal of invasive exotic species is necessary until
the native plants become well established. Planting native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous species
immediately after invasive removal will help to suppress invasive exotic growth. See Appendix
H for a list of native species suitable for Zone C.
Once the greenway trail is constructed, Zone C will be more accessible than it currently is
and an invasive exotic removal program can begin. This will present opportunities for service
learning by involving local volunteer groups. Students from UGA or local high schools could
receive course credit in exchange for community service. This type of program would benefit
both people and the environment by providing the chance to learn about riparian ecosystems
while improving them.
79 Zones D and E refer to the open areas located roughly in the center of the project site.
These zones are to be managed as open fields or meadows varying somewhat in species
composition. Zone D occurs where the soil is slightly higher and drier while Zone E is at a lower
elevation and occasionally wet. Consequently there will be overlap of species although some will
flourish in one zone or the other. Currently, both zones are dominated by Rubus allegheniensis
(Blackberry), with patches of Rhus sp. (Sumac), and a mix of native and exotic tree seedlings, grasses, and herbaceous plants. Although Rubus allegheniensis is a native plant, its invasive nature in this situation decreases species diversity and should therefore be removed. Growth of desirable native species can be encouraged by mowing and seeding at strategic times. For example, after mowing the area close to the ground, it is seeded using a no-till drill method in the fall. For the first year, the area is mowed to a height of 6 inches to suppress fast growing weeds.
Since most wildflower grass seedlings will not exceed 6” in one year, they will not be damaged by the mowing. (“Prairie”) An alternative and sometimes more effective method of establishing a native grass and wildflower meadow is to eradicate all existing exotic weeds. This is accomplished by an end of summer mowing, followed by an application of glyphosate herbicide in the fall when the vegetation has re-grown to a height of about 1 foot. The herbicide is reapplied three to four times throughout the growing season of the following year. (“Prairie”)
Once the area is completely free of weeds, it may be seeded or plugged with native grasses and wildflowers (see Appendix I for native species lists for both zones). Either way that the meadow is prepared and planted, rotational mowing of half of the meadow every other year after it is established will prevent any certain species from dominating the others, thus maximizing species diversity. A rotational mowing regime also increases habitat diversity by leaving some sections
standing for animals to over winter in. (“Prairie”) This management regime also prevents the
80 establishment of woody species in the meadow. This is important because tall trees will interfere
with the utility right-of-way. Existing stands of native Rhus sp., Sumac, should be allowed to
remain because they are of an acceptable height for the right-of-way and can easily be mown
around.
In keeping with the ecological criteria, the preparation, planting and maintenance of all
zones including D and E should increase the environmental quality of the site. Therefore, if herbicide is applied in preparing the land for planting then every precaution will be taken to make sure it is done safely. Other approaches to meadow establishment involve tilling the soil
but are not recommended for this site because Zone D is on a slope and prone to erosion
problems and Zone E is at an elevation that may flood periodically. Tilling will exacerbate the
associated sediment movement. A controlled fire regime is another method of meadow
establishment and management but is not recommended here because of site constraints such as
power lines, the sewer system, and proximity to buildings.
Zone F refers to the slope between the Oconee Street parking lot and the North Oconee
River. It is vital that this area be densely vegetated to help slow and filter any storm water
running off from the parking area to protect the water quality of the nearby North Oconee River.
The proposed trail location calls for the removal of some existing trees and shrubs in this zone.
The quality of this vegetation is poor, being dominated by invasive exotic species and severely
cut back out of the right-of-way. Vegetation of higher ecological and aesthetic quality will
replace it once the trail is installed. Since this zone is rather steep in many places, mowing is not
possible as in Zones D and E, and formal planting is not recommended as in Zone A.
Consequently, this area will be planted in the fall with small trees, spreading shrubs that tend to
colonize, and other characteristic species of fields and roadsides of north Georgia (see Appendix
81 J for suggested species list). Bare root shrubs and herbaceous/grass plugs are ideal for this situation because plants are sometimes cheaper and easier to transport on slopes in this form compared to large containers. Weeds will be suppressed until the plantings are able to shade out undesirable competitors. Hand pulling, mulching, and under-planting with annual cover crops can aid in combating weeds. All plantings in Zone F will be watered regularly for a few growing seasons to help insure survival.
Educational Components
Educational signage will be installed at Easley’s Mill Overlook and at the larger granite outcrop. An information kiosk will be located on the side of the restroom facility facing the parking area. Since these facilities will attract people to the building, this is an appropriate place for a greenway map and educational displays about porous pavement or other water quality issues. There are many opportunities to share knowledge about the environment along the greenway and some key locations are marked on the concept plan (Figure 29). Some messages the signs will convey are: plant species identification, the importance of managing for biodiversity, information on how to manage for biodiversity on private property, and specific water quality issues associated with the site. Some will point out the significance of protecting ecologically sensitive habitats such as the granite outcrops and the river bank and will aid in reducing damage from trampling or vandalism. Directional signage should also be incorporated throughout the site including on the river or “blue trail.” Take outs and portage routes must be clearly marked.
Service learning can remedy several problems at once (see Appendix K for a definition of service learning). Labor intensive tasks such as clearing, planting, mulching, and watering can be accomplished with little or no cost while volunteers learn about plants and ecology. Other
82 incentives for volunteering time and labor could include college course credit and community
service awards.
The entire site can serve as an outdoor laboratory where standard classroom education is enriched with hands on experiences in nature. Easley’s Mill Overlook would provide an ideal setting for an outdoor classroom. This would also be an appropriate place for interpretive signage or art installations that convey an environmental or historic message related to the site (Figures
37 and 38). Students, volunteers, and visitors aren’t the only ones who could benefit from these educational opportunities. Those in charge of the greenway system can learn from experimental restoration and management projects on this site. Regarding the invasive exotic management in
Zone C, certain sections could receive different treatments and the results might guide future
riparian vegetation management. For example, some sections can be replanted with natives once the invasive species are removed. The exotics might be suppressed in other sections without replanting. The outcomes may reveal which treatment is the most effective over time.
Summary
This comprehensive plan attempts to balance human desires and environmental health
through the application of specific ecological design criteria to greenway development. Every
element of this design, including the installation, use of materials, and management plan attends
to protecting and improving water quality, increasing biodiversity, and minimizing negative
environmental impacts. Furthermore, educational opportunities are incorporated in the design in
hopes of increasing public awareness of these efforts and other environmental issues. As the
term concept plan implies, these recommendations are ideas meant to illustrate a vision of what
this site has the potential to become. By building upon the premises of this design, the ultimate
83 goal of improving ecological health while offering sensory rich, educational, and recreational experiences in nature to people can be attained.
84 Expanded Parking
Restroom Facilities and Information Kiosk Covered Restored Granite Pavilion Outcrop CONEE STREET
Greenway Trail to East Campus Village
Greenway Trail Restored Granite Entrance Outcrop Boardwalk Connection to Dudley Park * * LEGEND Meadow Picnic Area Path with steps * Educational Signs
* Boat Launch/Take out * Future Spur Trail Easley’s Mill * Overlook * * Existing Vegetation ** NORTH OCONEE RIVER NORTH
scale: 1”=60’ - 0” Power Line Figure 29 Concept Plan 85 Eastern Red Cedar Juniperus virginiana (typical)
Eastern Redbud OCONEECercis STREET canadensis (typical) Restroom Facilities and Information Kiosk Scarlet Oak Quercus coccinea
Existing North Oconee River Greenway Sign Native Grass Underplanting
Shining Sumac Rhus coppalina (typical)
Native Grass Underplanting species include:
Oconee Street sidewalk Andropogon virginicus Broomsedge Stone Andropogon ternarius Seatwall Splitbeard Bluestem Schyzachyrium scoparium Power line Little Bluestem Restored Granite Muhlenbergia capillaris Outcrop Pink Muhly
Proposed connection from Canoe/Kayak 24 proposed parking Oconee Street sidewalk to loading zone spaces new greenway * NORTH Greenway Trail Entrance and sign scale: 1”=30’ - 0”
Figure 30 Oconee Street Parking Plan 86
Figure 31 – Existing Oconee Street parking area
Figure 32 – Oconee Street parking area with proposed plantings
87 Restored Granite Outcrop
North Oconee River Greenway Trail
Meadow
Redbud Underplanting species include:
Aquilegia canadensis Ramped Boardwalk Columbine Eastern Redbud with non-slip surface Aster oblongifolius Cercis canadensis Aromatic Aster (see list at right for Picnic Area Echinacea purpurea underplanting species) Meadow Stone Purple Coneflower Seatwall Muhlenbergia capillaris Pink Muhly Rudbeckia triloba Tri-lobed Rudbeckia Plantings around plaza and boardwalk species include: Historic Stone Wall * Note: Additional historic Wild Hydrangea * mill and dam structures Boardwalk remain standing on site Hydrangea arborescens Overlook Boat Launch and must be located before implementation of Virginia Sweetspire this plan. Itea virginica Top of Piedmont Azalea dam NORTH Rhododendron canescens scale: 1”=30’ - 0” Maple-leaf Viburnum Power line Viburnum acerifolium Figure 33 Easley’s Mill Overlook Plan 88 OCONEE STREET
LEGEND
Zone A: Parking area and Easley’s Mill Overlook
Zone B: Granite Outcrops
Zone C: Riparian Edge
Zone D: Dry Meadow
Zone E: Seasonally Wet Meadow Zone F: Dry Slope
(2’ contours)
NORTH OCONEE RIVER NORTH
scale: 1”=60’ - 0”
Figure 34 Vegetation Management Plan 89
Figure 35 – Stone and concrete picnic table in Dudley Park
Figure 36 – Existing educational sign on North Oconee River Greenway Trail
90
Figure 37 – Metal sculpture, bench, and educational sign on North Oconee River Greenway
(sculpture and bench by local artist Harold Rittenberry)
Figure 38 – Detail of metal bench
91
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSIONS
Looking Back
The goal of this thesis work was two fold. First, a conceptual framework was developed for the design of outdoor recreation areas that would act to increase environmental awareness of its users. Second, a concept plan was created for a portion of the North Oconee River Greenway that was based on a set of ecological design criteria that grew out of the conceptual framework.
The concept plan and its attendant management protocols served the ecological design criteria by improving the ecological health of a human-impacted site, encouraging human engagement with nature by bringing people into the space, and increasing environmental awareness by offering positive recreational and educational experiences in nature.
A location on the North Oconee River Greenway was chosen as the site for the application portion of this thesis for two main reasons. First, the site is one of several proposed
sections of the Oconee Rivers Greenway system not yet constructed. Second, the site has a rich
combination of cultural history, unique ecosystems, and a variety of opportunities and
constraints. The task of sorting out such a challenging mix of issues was appealing.
Many topics were considered in an effort to meet this goal, beginning with an exploration
of the link between environmental awareness and environmental protection in the second chapter. Basic greenway functions and principles of ecological design were considered in the
third chapter. Examination and distillation of this body of information produced three guidelines
92 that would steer the final plan towards meeting the ecological design criteria. In the fourth chapter I considered contemporary examples of public- sector landscape architecture that contain elements of ecological design and environmental education. The case studies were prefaced by discussions regarding storytelling and the fusion of art in science in ecological design. The project site was described in the fifth chapter through written accounts and photographs of existing conditions, opportunities, and constraints. Finally, a conceptual plan was presented in
the sixth chapter that attends to the selected ecological design criteria and addresses site design,
use of materials, vegetation management, and education goals. What follows is a brief summary
of lessons learned from each chapter.
Lessons Learned
Widespread environmental awareness is essential to environmental protection. Based on
the premise that people learn to love what is familiar to them, it is clear that developing an
emotional attachment to nature is a critical step towards protecting it. The lack of ecological
literacy is a prevalent problem in modern society and is linked with ongoing environmental
crises. Some people attribute this dilemma to the absence of ecological teaching in most formal
educational systems. Incorporating outdoor learning into standard curricula can help to diminish
biophobia by encouraging positive experiences in nature. Findings from a 2001 study published
in Environment and Behavior suggest that a link does indeed exist between emotional attachment and protective behavior. Furthermore, the results imply that positive experiences in natural environments can lead people to engage in ecologically protective behavior. Agencies such as the Center for Ecoliteracy and the North American Center for Environmental Education play an important role in seeing that ecological thinking becomes an integral part of our educational systems and our daily lives.
93 According to authorities in the field of Landscape Architecture (including William
Thompson, editor of Landscape Architecture Magazine, and Robert France, professor of
Landscape Architecture at the Harvard Design School), some landscape designers contribute to
environmental protection by basing their work on sound ecological principles. Unfortunately, the
majority of them do not. Since human expansion and consequential land development are
inevitable, the one thing that can be controlled is our approach to development. I believe
landscape architects possess the power to change the way we shape our environment by
designing, building, and managing landscapes that reflect a sense of stewardship towards nature
rather than dominion over it.
Designing landscapes based on ecological design principles is one way to improve the
quality of our environment. Designing greenways, in particular, is one of the most viable
strategies for protecting and improving ecological health. This is because they often fit easily
into urban situations and provide places for people to interact with nature on a regular basis.
Urban greenways along streams or rivers can help to maintain and improve water quality by
acting as a buffer between intensive human use and waterways. They can also aid in stabilizing
hydrologic regimes and maintaining healthy aquatic systems. The project site is located on a
proposed urban riverside greenway and has the potential to fulfill these functions if designed to meet the following criteria: 1) each component must strive to maintain or improve water quality,
2) each component must strive to maintain or increase biodiversity where applicable, and 3) each
component must strive to eliminate or minimize negative environmental impacts on the site. The
rules to be followed in efforts to meet these criteria are: 1) to recognize that all elements of the
site are interconnected, 2) to design with nature and look to it for inspiration, and 3) to balance
the ecological needs of the site with those of its human users. Furthermore, all management
94 practices must be in keeping with the criteria and should be geared towards maintaining a
sufficient level of ecological integrity throughout the site.
The perceived dichotomy existing between art and science as they relate to landscape
design is just that, a perception. While some feel art is ill-equipped to solve environmental
problems on its own, it does seem quite capable of drawing attention to the problems which is
the first step towards change. Others view science as something not especially inspirational or
beautiful on its own account. However, I see art and science as different ways of telling similar
stories. Robert France says that landscape architecture can be an effective means of sustaining
nature if there exists a marriage between “the feeling of art and the knowing of science.” (France
“Green” 35) Contemporary examples of landscape architecture exemplify successful ecological
design through a fusion of science and art. The Water Pollution Control Lab in Portland, Oregon is a demonstration of scientific purpose with art overlaid and intertwined. Waterworks Gardens
in Renton, Washington began with an artist’s vision, displaying combinations of artistic
expression and technical function on every level. The restoration projects on Prince Memorial
Greenway in Santa Rosa, California, utilize science and technology to restore native fish
populations and art installations to tell the story of their efforts. The Ohlone Greenway in
Berkeley, California is the one example of the four that best unites science and art in a way that
is most relevant to this thesis project. Local agencies and volunteers have joined forces in a
variety of creek restoration projects including daylighting culverted streams, stabilizing banks,
removing barriers to fish migration, restoring wildlife habitat, removing invasive exotic species
and replanting with native plants, creating a water quality monitoring program, and protecting
endangered species. Art is an integral part of this greenway in communicating information regarding these restorative efforts to the public. Sculptures from local artists are featured along
95 the greenway, as well as other art installations (temporary and permanent), interpretive signs, and
exhibits featuring significant aspects of natural and cultural history unique to the area. Similar
opportunities exist on the site chosen for this thesis project.
The site chosen as the focus of my design application is located on the North Oconee
River near the Oconee Street parking area. It is the northern-most segment of the proposed
section of the North Oconee River Greenway that is to connect Oconee Street to the University
of Georgia’s East Campus Village. The site of the former Easley’s Mill, Athens’ first settlement and founding place of the University of Georgia, is located at Cedar Shoals (Figure 11). Some historic structures remain standing today including an original mill building across the river and a stone wall that appears to have been part of the dam. The presence of two granite outcrops provides a rare opportunity to restore specialized ecosystems while educating people about their
ecological significance. Because of the rich cultural past and distinctive landscapes, I believe
this site will be a valuable addition to the North Oconee River Greenway and Heritage Trail.
The final plan developed for this site is a synthesis of the research and analyses
discussed in earlier chapters. The major components of the design are greenway trail placement,
expanded parking on Oconee Street, a plaza and overlook at Easley’s Mill, boat launch/takeout
locations, planting plans, and vegetation management zones. Each of these components attends
to protecting and improving water quality, increasing biodiversity, and minimizing negative
environmental impacts in the most appropriate manner. See Table 2 for a detailed list of how
each design component attends to the ecological design criteria, human desires, site constraints,
and education. For example, by building a boardwalk at the Easley’s Mill site rather than
installing a paved surface, erosion and sedimentation caused by grading can be avoided. The
boardwalk will provide a safe place for people to view the rapids yet doesn’t compromise the
96 integrity of the historic stone wall adjacent to it. Educating visitors about the cultural and
industrial past of this site is accomplished by installing interpretive signs at this overlook.
Other educational opportunities are incorporated into the rest of the plan such as signs
that highlight the ecological significance of the granite outcrops and riparian vegetation. I
speculate that a service-learning program would also prove to be an effective means of educating
volunteers while accomplishing labor intensive tasks. Not everyone learns in the same way or at
the same pace. That is why I believe a variety of educational opportunities should be integrated into this site. Doing this would help to attain the ultimate goal which is to create a place where residents of Athens Clarke County can become aware of, connect with, and develop a sense of stewardship towards their environment.
Looking Ahead
I envision this design as an experimental project and/or demonstration model. The
successes and failures of various management strategies applied here could offer valuable insight
into what management practices are best suited for the rest of the greenway system. By
successfully replacing invasive exotic species with attractive native plants, people might realize
that what they see now is not the way a healthy Georgia floodplain should look. This, in turn, could spark enthusiasm and summon support for more invasive exotic removal projects. For the sake of quantifiable comparison, I recommend that extensive inventories of flora and fauna be conducted prior to any design implementation.
I also recommend that the trail from Dudley Park be extended to meet this new greenway trail (Figure 29). As briefly mentioned in the sixth chapter, the connection would have to occur by way of cantilevered boardwalk under the Oconee Street Bridge. Currently, greenway trail
users coming from Dudley Park must walk through a parking lot, cross Oconee Street, and walk
97 through the Oconee Street parking area to get back down to the river. While walking on the trail
in Dudley Park, I felt the urge to continue walking along the river without having to confront
automobiles. Although constructing a cantilevered boardwalk might come with a high initial
cost, I believe it would greatly improve the North Oconee River Greenway experience.
I also suggest that the mill building on the east side of the river, currently Dial America,
be purchased and made into a restaurant or bar. One step towards protecting and improving the
quality of the North Oconee River is to make sure people can see it. By returning the building to
public use and building a safer deck, this could become a pleasurable gathering place that brings
river issues to the forefront.
Appropriate permits regarding floodplain allowances, Georgia Power right-of-ways,
utility easements, historic preservation requirements, herbicide applications, and all other items
subject to regulation must be acquired before design implementation to avoid unnecessary
conflicts.
Final Thoughts
The plan presented in this thesis is conceptual. It is meant to illustrate one person’s
vision of what this site could become. I’m confident that this design would serve as strong starting point for the development of a working plan for this section of the North Oconee River
Greenway. The ideas presented in this thesis, if expanded upon with careful consideration of site
opportunities and constraints, can lead to the protection and enhancement of this place and others
like it.
This proposed segment of the North Oconee River Greenway offers a variety of unique
educational opportunities to its users. Implementing this plan will bring people closer to the
North Oconee River on a daily basis and will bring water quality issues to the forefront as a
98 result. The trail, overlook, picnic area, and spur paths will provide public access to the river and
to other significant cultural and ecological elements that might otherwise remain unrecognized.
Restoration efforts will improve the ecological health of this site while demonstrating a sense of
stewardship and care towards the environment. Signs communicating these efforts to greenway
users will point out the values of restoring habitat, managing for biodiversity, and protecting the
environment. Art installations on this greenway will have the potential to draw even more attention to the restoration efforts and their importance, as well as conveying other environmental messages. Service-learning programs will further increase environmental awareness by offering positive hands-on experiences in nature to student groups and volunteers.
Overall, the implementation of this concept plan will increase ecological literacy in the community and thereby galvanize us toward more sustainable living.
99 Table 2 - Design components in response to ecological design criteria, human desires, site constraints, and education goals
PROTECT/IMPROVE WATER MINIMIZE ENVIRONMEN- RESPOND TO SITE CON- COMMUNICATE INFORMA- DESIGN COMPONENT QUALITY MAXIMIZE BIODIVERSITY TAL IMPACT ADDRESS HUMAN DESIRES STRAINTS TION TO USERS Parking Lot • porous pavement or gravel rec- • recommended species are part • parking located on currently • increase number of parking • suggested plants will not inter- • information kiosk could display ommended to reduce stormwater of a native plant community and level contour so no grading is spaces from 7 to 24 fere with power line right-of- information regarding water runoff will increase current species required that would cause ero- • provides loading zone close to way. quality, porous pavement, site • vegetated shoulders rather than diversity sion and sedimentation trail entrance for boats and dis- • no grading required that would restoration projects, greenway curb/gutter help evenly distribute • grass, shrub and tree layers • no additional impervious sur- abled users interfere with ground field of map stormwater provide different wildlife habi- face • restroom facilities provided power transmission poles • dense planting areas in and tats • seat wall provides around perimeter help absorb • native grass underplantings gathering/resting place and filter stormwater runoff require infrequent mowing thus • plantings shade and cool any providing wildlife habitat for stormwater runoff longer periods of time Greenway Trail • proposed location in sewer • trail edge planted with several • clearing and grading reduced • provides recreational opportu- • allows sufficient room for • provides place for humans to easement so minimal clearing of species of low-growing native by sensitive placement nities for pedestrians, bikers, and maintenance vehicular access engage with nature vegetation required vegetation rather than turf • immediate soil stabilization boaters • not sited directly above sewer • provides access to unique cul- • mostly follows same contour • trail located along edge of recommended where grading • provides connection from lines to avoid conflicts tural and ecological elements (designed with the land) so no management zones so disruption does occur Oconee Street to Dudley Park • construction recommended to • educational nodes located grading required except for park- of habitats is minimized. and eventually to UGA’s East coordinate with scheduled sewer along trail for interpretive signs ing/main trail link Campus Village line repair and displays conveying ecologi- • trail edge planted with low- • no grading required that would cal information growing native vegetation that interfere with ground field of requires no chemical fertilizers power transmission poles or mowing Easley’s Mill Overlook • boardwalk floats above ground • suggested species for plantings • floating boardwalk overlook • provides river access and view • construction and materials are • signs tell history of site to avoid disturbance of soil and around overlook are native, typi- and ramp above ground reduced of rapids sensitive to flood plain restraints • located under power lines and water cal of riparian vegetation disturbance of soil, water, and • provides gathering/ resting/ • suggested plants will not inter- above historic dam: juxtaposi- • seat wall and plaza located on • overlook and ramp sited and historic elements outdoor classroom place along fere with power line right-of- tion of modern/historic power relatively level ground so mini- designed in such a way as to • seat wall and plaza sited on greenway way source displays cultural change mal to no grading required minimize necessary clearing of level ground so minimal to no • provides access to boat launch over time • boardwalk and plaza surface existing vegetation. grading required and picnic area are porous • non-toxic materials
Boat Launches • recommended location and • any soil disturbed during instal- • sited to require minimal to no • provide river access to boaters • located in level spots along • marked with signs for boaters type cause minimal to no erosion lation must be immediately sta- grading • conveniently located to trail, riverbank, not in strong currents conveying parking lot and load- • non-toxic materials bilized with native plantings • any soil disturbed by construc- parking,and loading area ing location as well as portage • any existing vegetation dis- tion should be immediately sta- route around dam turbed during installation must bilized be replaced with native plants
100 DESIGN COMPONENT PROTECT/IMPROVE WATER MINIMIZE ENVIRONMEN- RESPOND TO SITE CON- COMMUNICATE INFORMA- (Vegetation Management Zones) QUALITY MAXIMIZE BIODIVERSITY TAL IMPACT ADDRESS HUMAN DESIRES STRAINTS TION TO USERS Zone A: organized plantings in • suggested native plant species • suggested native plants will • suggested plants require no • enhance aesthetic quality of • suggested species will tolerate • if labeled, could help greenway parking area and Easley’s Mill are easily adaptable to site con- increase species diversity chemical fertilizers or pesticides parking lot, overlook and even thrive in existing con- users to become familiar with Overlook ditions so will not require chemi- • ground, shrub, and tree layers that could leach into soil and • shade automobiles, seat walls ditions native plants cal fertilizers or pesticides and provide different habitat types water • plantings will not interfere with will require minimal to no water- • native grass underplantings power line right-of-way ing after established require infrequent mowing so provide habitat longer
Zone B: granite outcrops • recommended restoration and • restoration management prac- • restoration and management • access allowed to larger out- • suggested management prac- • restoration of granite outcrops management practices will not tices will encourage native plant practices will protect sensitive crop once sufficiently restored tices are best suited to existing provide opportunities for people harm water quality growth that will increase both ecosystems conditions to learn about their ecological species and habitat diversity significance
Zone C: riparian vegetation • invasive exotic removal prac- • suppressing invasive exotics • recommended invasive exotic • selective vegetation manage- • suggested management prac- • service learning offers hands- tices will cause minimal to no will encourage native plant removal practices will cause ment will open up scenic views tices are best suited to existing on educational experiences to soil disturbance; careful chemi- growth, increasing species and minimal to no soil disturbance; of the river conditions volunteers regarding riparian cal application by “cut-treat” habitat diversity careful chemical application issues, plant id, etc. method will reduce risk of water using “cut-treat” method reduces • signs about restoration efforts contamination risk of soil and water contamina- can help people learn about inva- tion sive exotics, plant id, etc.
Zone D and E: dry (D) and sea- • if chemical herbicide is used in • suppressing dominant species • meadow requires minimal • provide aesthetic interest • plantings will not interfere with • demonstrate ecologically sensi- sonally wet (E) meadow meadow establishment, careful (exotic grasses and blackberry) mowing so reduces fuel use and • requires little maintenance power line right-of-way tive alternative to frequently application will reduce risk of will encourage native plant, exhaust from mowers mown lawns water contamination growth increasing species and habi- • chemical application needed • established native grass/ wild- tat diversity for meadow establishment will flower meadow requires no • tall grasses left standing over not harm soil, water, or other chemical fertilizers or pesticides; winter provide winter habitat for vegetation if correct procedure is infrequent mowing wildlife carefully followed
Zone F: dry slope below parking • provides vegetative buffer • spreading and colonizing native • no mowing or other mainte- • provide aesthetic interest • plantings will not interfere with • demonstrate ecologically sensi- area between parking lot and river, plants will increase species nance required of established • requires little maintenance power line right-of-way tive way to manage slopes will filter contaminants and slow diversity and provide year-round native plantings run off flow habitat for wildlife •provides vegetative buffer •will require minimal to no between parking lot and river, maintenance (watering) once slowing and absorbing rainfall established and filtering contaminants
101
REFERENCES
ACC Capitol Improvements Element. Project 6-F03, Feb. 2004.
ACC Planning Department. 1993 Zoning Application. Planning Commission Recommendation.
ACC Planning Department. 1996 Zoning Application. Planning Commission Recommendation.
Berkeley Partners for Parks. “Ohlone Greenway Commons.” Berkeley Partners for Parks. 3 Nov. 2004 http://www.bpfp.org/AdoptAParkGroups/OhloneCommons/Default.htm
Blankenship, Donna Gordon. “Waterworks Gardens: King County, WA, makes the public aware of stormwater infrastructure in an unexpected place.” Stormwater Mar./Apr. 2004. 27 Oct. 2004 http://www.forester.net/sw_0403_waterworks.html
Boswell, Rick. Georgia Power Engineering Supervisor. Personal communication. 11 Nov. 2004.
Burbanck, M.P., and R.B. Platt. “Granite Outcrop Communities of the Piedmont Plateau in Georgia.” Ecology 45 (1964): 292-305.
Burrell, C. Colson. “Controlling Invasive Exotic Plants.” Landscape Architecture 92.4 Apr. 2002: 28, 30, 102-103.
Capra, Fritjof. “Ecoliteracy: The Challenge of Education in the Next Century.” Center for Ecoliteracy. 19 Mar.1999. 10 Oct. 2004 http://www.ecoliteracy.org/pages/publications.html#capra
Center for Ecoliteracy. 10 Oct. 2004 http://www.ecoliteracy.org
City of Berkeley. “Dedication Features History of the Ohlone Peoples.” City of Berkeley 10 Oct. 2004. 3 Nov. 2004 http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/news/2004/10Oct/100604DedicationHistoryOhlone.html
“Clarke Greenway Can Be the Start of Something Great.” Athens-Banner Herald. 10 Dec. 1990.
Deck, Ben. “King Pkwy. Residents Split Over Greenway.” Athens Observer. 23 Jan. 1997.
Deck, Ben. “Landowner Takes Up Arms Against Greenway.” Athens Observer. 1 Jan. 1997.
102 Department of Natural Resources and Parks. “Welcome to Waterworks Gardens!” 27 Oct. 2004 http://dnr.metrokc.gov/WTD/waterworks/
De Vorsey, Louis. Papers of Athens Historical Society Volume 2. Athens, GA: Athens Historical Society, 1979.
Elton, C.S. Ecology of Invasion by Animals and Plants. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1958.
Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission 1999 Annual Report. 23 Feb. 2000.
Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission 2000 Annual Report. Feb. 2001.
Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission 2001 Annual Report. 12 Feb. 2002.
Flink, Charles A., and Robert M. Searns. Greenways: A Guide to Planning, Design, and Development. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1993.
Flink, Charles A., Kristine Olka, and Robert M. Searns. Trails for the Twenty-first Century. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2001.
Forster, Ndubisi. “Managing Change in the Landscape: A Synthesis of Approaches for Ecological Planning.” Landscape Journal 21.1 (2002): 156-174.
France, Robert. “Green World, Gray Heart? The Promise and Reality of Landscape Architecture in Sustaining Nature.” Harvard Design Magazine 18 Spring/Summer 2003: 30-36.
France, Robert. L. Wetland Design. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2003
Georgia Exotic Pest Plant Council. “Proposed Exotic Pest Plant Species in Georgia.” Georgia Exotic Pest Plant Council. 21 Nov. 2004 http://www.gaeppc.org/exotalk1.html
Galatowitsch, Susan M. “Ecological Design for Environmental Problem Solving.” Landscape Journal (1998): 99-107.
Hammatt, Heather. “Creating a Middle Ground: Landscape architects turn a mundane reservoir into a dynamic, responsive, changing, ecology, blending recreational use with environmental education.” Landscape Architecture 92.5 May 2002: 24, 26.
Hammes, Mary Jessica. “Remembering Charlie.” Georgia Magazine. 82.2 Mar. 2003. 11 Nov.2004 http://www.uga.edu/gm/303/FeatCharlie.html
Hartig, Terry; Florian G. Kaiser, and Peter A Bowler. “Psychological Restoration in nature as a positive motivation for Ecological Behavior.” Environment and Behavior 33.4 July 2001: 590-607.
103 Hightshoe, Gary L. Native Trees, Shrubs, and Vines for Urban and Rural America. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1988.
Hill, Kristina. “Green Good, Better, and Best: Effective Ecological Design in Cities.” Harvard Design Magazine 18 Spring/Summer 2003: 37-40.
Howett, Catherine. “Ecological Values in Twentieth-Century Landscape Design: A History and Hermeneutics.” Landscape Journal 17.2 Fall 1998: 80-99.
Hull, Augustus Longstreet. Annals of Athens, Georgia (1801-1901). Danielsville, GA: Heritage Papers, 1978.
Hynds, Ernest C. Antebellum Athens and Clarke County Georgia. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1974.
Johnson, Bart R. and Kristina Hill. Ecology and Design: Frameworks for Learning. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2002.
Johnson, Joel. Georgia Power, Athens Transmission Center. Personal communication. 11 Nov. 2004.
Kay, Jerry. “An Interview with Peter Buckley.” Center for Ecoliteracy. 7 Oct. 2004 http://www.ecoliteracy.org/pages/peterbuckley_interview.html
Kinsler, Laura. “Property Owners have Mixed Opinions about Greenway.” Athens Daily News. 10 Dec. 1996.
Labaree, Jonathan M. “How Greenways Work.” The National Park Service’s Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance Program and QLF/Atlantic Center for the Environment. 17 Nov. 2003 http://www.qlf.org/greenways/Title.html
Learn and Serve. “Service-Learning.” Learn and Serve. 1 Dec. 2004 http://learnandserve.org/about/service_learning.html
Little, Charles E. Greenways for America. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990.
“Logical Lasting Launches: Design Guidance for Canoe and Kayak Launches.” National Park Service. Spring 2004. 21 Nov. 2004 http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/rtca/helpfultools/launchguide.pdf
Lyle, John Tillman. Design for Human Ecosystems. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1985.
MacDonald, Stuart. “Questions and Answers on proposed ADA trail guides.” American Trails. 20 Nov. 2004 http://americantrails.org/resources/accessible/ADASummFeb00.html
104 McCarthy, Rebecca. “River Trail in Athens to Beckon Nature Fans.” Atlanta Constitution. 3 Dec. 1996.
McHarg, Ian L. Design with Nature. Garden City, N.Y.: Natural History Press, 1969.
Melby, Pete and Tom Cathcart. Regenerative Design Techniques: Practical Applications in Landscape Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
Merchant, Carolyn. “Partnership with Nature.” Landscape Journal (1998): 69-79.
Midgley, Jan W. Southeastern Wildflowers. Crane Hill, 1999.
Miller, James H. Nonnative Invasive Plants of Southern Forests: A field guide for identification and control. Asheville, N.C.: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 2003. 25 May 2004 http://www.invasive.org/eastern/srs/control.html
Morrison, Darrel. Handbook for LAND 4400/6400 #1. Summer 1999.
Mozingo, Louise. “The Aesthetics of Ecological Design: Seeing Science as Culture.” Landscape Journal 16.1 Spring 1997: 46-59.
Murase Associates. 26 Oct. 2004 http://www.murase.com/ie5/portfolio/projects/watr/watr.htm
Odom, E.P. Ecology. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1975.
Orr, David. Earth in Mind. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1994.
Orr, David. Ecological Literacy. Albany: State University of New York, 1992.
Portland Bureau of Environmental Services. “Welcome to Portland’s Water Pollution Control Laboratory.” Portland Online. 26 Oct. 2004 http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cfm?c=32989
Popp, Mathew. The Interpretation of Plant Communities for Elementary School Children: Granite Outcrops: A Case Study. The University of Georgia. 1987.
Pouder, Nicholas. “Water Sensitive Ecological Planning and Design.” Landscape Journal 20.1 (2001): 199-110.
“Prairie Management Procedures.” Prairie Nursery. 21 Nov. 2004 http://www.prairienursery.com/Prairie_Guide/5Manage_Proc.htm
Quill, Anne Marie. “Local Greenway Group Hopes Proposed Trail Will Come Alive.” Red and Black. 14 Feb 1995.
105 RRM Design Group. “Prince Memorial Greenway.” RRM Design Group. 27 Oct. 2004 http://www.rrmdesign.com/portfolio/rec_trails/prince-memorial.html
Resenberger, Boyce. “The Final Countdown.” 1999. 7 Oct. 2004. http://magazine.audobon.org/biodiversity.html
Rowe, H.J. History of Athens and Clarke County. Athens, GA: H.J. Rowe, 1923.
“Sandy Creek Trail Project Fruition of 30-Year Effort.” The Athens Observer. 6 Dec. 1990.
Searns, Robert. “Unplugged and reconnecting: working toward a new mentality for trails.” American Trails. 16 Nov. 2003 http://www.americantrails.org/resources/benefits/unpluggedSearns.html
Sharpe, G.W. Interpreting the Environment. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1982.
Spirn, Anne. Language of Landscape. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.
SPLOST IV Progress Reports: Project 16 – Oconee River Greenway-Heritage Trail Division II- A. 9 Nov 2004 http://www.athensclarkecounty.com/splost/splost4/project16.html
SPLOST IV Progress Reports: Project 17 – North Oconee River Greenway – Phase I -Division A & B. 9 Nov 2004 http://www.athensclarkecounty.com/splost/splost4/project17.html
SPLOST 2005 Project Request Form.” 1 Nov. 2004 http://www.athensclarkecounty.com/splost/
Smith, Daniel S. and Paul Cawood Hellmund. Ecology of Greenways. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1993.
Thayer, Robert L., Jr. “Landscape as an Ecologically Revealing Language.” Landscape Journal 17.2 Fall 1998: 118-130.
The Oconee Rivers Greenway Commission. 9 Nov. 2004 http://www.sandycreeknaturecenter.com/gwy/gwycommission.php
Thompson, J. William. Landscape Architecture 93.9 Sept 2003: 5.
Thompson, J. William, and Kim Sorvig. Sustainable Landscape Construction: A Guide to Green Building Outdoors. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 2000.
Urban Creeks Council of California. “Codornices Creek Watershed Restoration Action Plan.” Urban Creeks Council of California 3 Nov. 2004 http://www.urbancreeks.org/CCWRAP_Program_Elements.html
VanderRyn, Sim. Ecological Design. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1996.
106 Viani, Lisa Owens. “From the Bottom Up: In one California Community, a Breakthrough for Fish and Folks.” Landscape Architecture 93.9 Sept 2003: 42, 44-46, 48.
Wasowski, Sally and Andy Wasowski. Gardening with Native Plants of the South. Dallas, Texas: Taylor Publishing, 1994.
Westley, Mike. “Sensory-rich Education.” Landscape Design 317 Feb 2003: 31-35. .
107
APPENDICES
108 Appendix A – Definition of terms characterizing ecosystem stability (Lyle 201)
• constancy: the lack of in some parameter of the system
• persistence: survival time
• inertia: the ability to resist external perturbations
• elasticity: the speed with which the former state is returned to following a perturbation
• amplitude: area over which the system is stable
• cyclical stability: oscillation around some central point or zone
• trajectory stability: movement towards some end point
109 Appendix B – Founding members of Sandy Creek Nature Center
Charles Aguar (deceased)
Ben Chappell
Walter Cook
Mahala Harrison
Daniel Hope
Albert Ike
Suzanne Lindsay
Robert Saveland
Don Scott (deceased)
AlmaWalker (deceased)
Mary Lamar West (deceased)
110 Appendix C – Endemic species of granite outcrops (Popp 42)
Agrostis uniflora, Bentgrass
Amphianthus pusillus, an aquatic
Arenaria uniflora, Sandwort
Crotonopsis elliptica
Cyperus granitophilus, Sedge
Diamorpha smalii, Diamorpha
Hypericum splendens, Pineweed
Isoetes melanospora, an aquatic quillwort
Juncus georgiana, Rush
Liatris microcephala, Blazing Star
Oenothera fruticosa var. sublosa, Primrose
Phacelia dubia var. georgiana
Quercus georgiana, Georgian Oak
Sedum pusillum, Sedum
Talinum teretifolium, Rock Portulaca
Viguiera porteri, Confederate Daisy
* see pages 34-49, and Appendix C of Mathew Popp’s thesis for an extensive list of granite outcrop plant species and related information.
111 Appendix D – A.D.A., Americans with Disabilities Act, trail requirements (MacDonald)
Under the proposed guidelines, an accessible trail would meet these minimum technical provisions:
• Clear tread width: 36” minimum
• Tread obstacles: 2” high maximum (up to 3” high where running and cross slopes are
5% or less)
• Cross slope: 5% max.
• Running slope (trail grade) meets one or more of the following:
- 5% or less for any distance.
- Up to 8.33% for 200’ max. Resting intervals no more than 200’ apart.
- Up to 10% for 30’ max. Resting intervals 30’.
- Up to 12.5% for 10’ max. Resting intervals 10’.
• No more than 30% of the total trail length may exceed a running slope of 8.33%.
• Passing space: provided at least every 1000’ where trail width is less than 60”.
• Signs: shall be provided indicating the length of the accessible trail segment.
112 Appendix E – General recommendations regarding canoe launch design (“Logical” 5-7)
General recommendations for designing an accessible launch • Height above water: Between 9" and 2' from highest expected water level • Width: At least 5' wide, preferably 6' to 12' • Length: At least 25' to allow paddlers “dry” access to entire length of their boats • Slope: ADA Accessibility Guidelines require that slopes not exceed 8.33% whenever possible; A slope exceeding 15% will make transition from land to water difficult for any paddler • Support: Handrails or other support structures, including step-down designs or ropes, help paddlers balance their weight during put-in and take-out • Location: Ideally in areas without heavy flow, erosion, exposure to elements, heavy boat traffic,or fragile riparian habitats
General recommendations for designing a launch that is “best-suited” (The type of launch chosen should be suitable for a particular access location, meaning that it should be the most sensible choice considering the characteristics of the water body, as well as relevant climatic and ecological factors.) • Is constructed in accordance with any applicable regulations • Provides safe access, away from potential river hazards, especially at different flow level • Can withstand flow levels, currents, and exposure to elements at a particular site • Accommodates paddlers in varying water depths • Provides a firm surface for launching, despite changes in sedimentation levels • Will not be easily damaged due to climatic or seasonal conditions • Does not cause damage to riparian habitats or vegetation during its construction and is unlikely to have environmental impacts over time and through usage • Is not constructed in an area vulnerable to erosion • Is constructed with consideration to its intended uses and frequency of use
General recommendations for designing a launch that is cost-effective • Use construction only when absolutely necessary. In many cases, an actual launch structure may not be needed; firm or sandy banks, level rocks, and beaches can often provide sufficient access ( see Chapter IV); kayakers may only need a hardened bank for access • Choose access sites with minimal exposure to winds and heavy currents, preferably near calmer areas of water, such as near eddies; if this is not possible, consider creating a vegetative or other type of buffer to provide protection from the elements • To reduce construction needs and costs, make modifications to existing boat docks or shoreline structures to make them more “paddler-friendly” • Construct launches that serve multiple purposes, such as mitigating erosion or restoring wetland vegetation; simple ramps or implanted beaches may help to stabilize a fragile bank or provide “soft treatments” while also enabling access
113 General recommendations for designing a launch that is environment-friendly (Use of low-impact designs and non-toxic materials is essential to watershed health, from protecting water quality, vegetation, and riparian habitats to enabling sustainable recreation. In many states, environmental regulations must be considered prior to, and during, launch construction.) • Investigate any applicable regulations; develop launch designs in accordance with these regulations • Use structures requiring minimal construction or alteration to the shoreline ( see Chapter XI for information on low-impact designs) • Consult with local natural resource specialist during the planning and construction phases to screen for the presence of ecologically sensitive nesting sites, rookeries, spawning areas, or endangered species; an optimal put-in site may not be feasible for ecological reasons • Merge the needs of natural functions and the desired recreational uses of the water; with rivers and streams, avoid making any channel modifications and preserve in-stream habitats as much as possible • Monitor watershed conditions and changes in stream morphology continually • Gather data from local or state agencies that monitor water levels and flows to develop a launch that will accommodate the conditions of the water body over time • Avoid using hard reinforcements (e.g., concrete, steel, rock) where shorelines are eroding; use bioengineering methods, such as developing a riparian buffer planted with native species, to protect vegetation and habitats and stabilize shorelines while sheltering the launch area from the elements; along streams, wider buffers can allow space for lateral movements and can help to reestablish meander over time -- these methods allow plant species to become self-sustaining and can also improve aesthetics
114 Appendix F – Top ten exotic plant pests in Georgia (Georgia Exotic Pest Plant Council)
Pueraria montana, Kudzu
Ligustrum sinense, Chinese Privet
Lonicera japonica, Japanese Honeysuckle
Hydrilla verticillata, Hydrilla
Sapium sebiferum, Chinese Tallow Tree
Microstegium vimineum, Nepalese Browntop
Phyllostachys aurea, Bamboo
Elaeagnus umbellata, Autumn Olive
Wisteria sinense, Chinese Wisteria
Albizia julibrissin, Mimosa
115 Appendix G – “Cut-treat” method of invasive exotic removal (Miller 3)
Cut-treat involves herbicide concentrates or herbicide-water mixtures applied to the outer circumference of freshly cut stumps or the entire top surface of cut stems, applied with a backpack sprayer, spray bottle, wick, or paint brush. Freshly cut stems and stumps of woody stems, including canes and bamboo, can be treated with herbicide mixtures to prevent resprouting and to kill roots. Cutting is usually by chainsaw or brush saw, but can be accomplished by handsaws or cutting blades. To minimize deactivation of the herbicide, remove sawdust from stumps before treatment. Treat stems and stumps as quickly as possible after cutting with a backpack sprayer or utility spray bottle for spray applications or a wick applicator, lab wash bottle, or paintbrush for small stems. Add a non-ionic surfactant to the mix to aid in penetration, if permitted by the label.
For stumps over 3 inches in diameter, completely wet the outer edge with the herbicide or herbicide mixture. Completely wet the tops of smaller stumps and all cut stems in a clump. Apply a basal spray mixture of herbicide, oil, and penetrant to stumps that have remained untreated for over 2 hours.
The most effective time for the stump spray method is late winter and summer. Although winter treatments are slightly less effective than growing season applications, the absence of foliage on cut stems and branches produces some offsetting gains in application efficiency.
116 Appendix H – Suggested native plant list for Zone C/Riparian
(Hightshoe, Midgley, Morrison, Wasowski)
Trees Acer rubrum, Red Maple Acer sacharinum, Silver Maple Aesculus pavia, Red Buckeye Asimina triloba, Pawpaw Betula nigra, River Birch Carpinus carolininana, Musclewood Carya ovata, Shagbark hickory Celtis laevigata, Hackberry Cornus florida, Flowering Dogwood Fagus grandifolia, American Beech Halesia Carolina, Carolina Silverbell Ilex opaca, American holly Liriodendron tulipifera, Tulip Poplar Magnolia virginiana, Sweetbay Magnolia Morus rubra, Red Mulberry Nyssa sylvatica, Blackgum Ostrya virginiana, Hophornbeam Oxydendrum arboretum, Sourwood Platanus occidentalis, Sycamore Quercus nigra, Water Oak Ulmus rubra, Slippery Elm
Shrubs Aesculus sylvatica, Painted Buckeye Alnus serrulata, Common Alder Aronia arbutifoia, Red Chokeberry Cephalanthus occidentalis, Buttonbush Cornus amomum, Silky Dogwood Euonymus americanus, Hearts-a-burstin’ Hamamelis virginiana, Witchhazel Hydrangea arborescens, Wild hydrangea Ilex deciduas, Possumhaw Ilex verticillata, Winterberry Itea virginica, Virginia Sweetspire Lindera benzoin, Spicebush Rhododendron canescens, Piedmont Azalea Rhododendron nudiflorum, Pinxterbloom Azalea Sambucus canadensis, Elderberry Vaccineum corymbosum, Highbush Blueberry Viburnum acerifolium, Maple-leaf Viburnum
117 Viburnum dentatum, Arrowwood Viburnum Xanthorhiza simplicissima, Yellowroot
Vines Bignonia capreolata, Crossvine Clematis virginiana, Virgin’s Bower Decumaria Barbara, Climbing Hydrangea Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Virginia Creeper
Grasses and Herbaceous Plants Antennaria plantaginifolia, Pussy-toes Aquilegia canadensis, Columbine Aster spp., Aster Asarum arifolium, Wild Ginger Asclepias incarnata, Swamp Milkweed Chasmanthium latifolium, River Oats Elymus virginicus, Virginia Wild Rye Lobelia cardinalis, Cardinal Flower Lobelia syphilitica, Blue Lobelia Impatiens capensis, Jewelweed Tradescantia virginiana, Spiderwort
Ferns Onoclea sensibilis, Sensitive Fern Polystichum acrostichoides, Christmas Fern Thelypteris noveboracensis, New York Fern
118 Appendix I -- Suggested native plant list for Zones D and E/Warm Season Grass and Wildflower Meadow
(Hightshoe, Midgley, Morrison, Wasowski)
Zone D (Relatively Dry) Amsonia ciliata, Texas Bluestar Andropogon gerrardii, Big Bluestem Andropogon virginicus, Broomsedge Andropogon ternarius , Splitbeard Bluestem Asclepias tuberosa, Butterfly Weed Aster spp., Aster Coreopsis spp., Coreopsis Echinacea spp., Coneflower Eryngium yuccifolium, Rattlesnake Master Monarda fistulosa, Beebalm Muhlenbergia capillaris, Pink Muhly Schyzachyrium scoparium, LittleBluestem Solidago spp., Goldenrod Sporobolus heterolepis, Prairie Dropseed
Zone E ( Seasonally Wet) Andropogon Glomeratus, Wooly Broomsedge Andropogon virginicus, Broomsedge Asclepias incarnata, Swamp Milkweed Baptisia alba, White Wild Indigo Coreopsis rosea, Pink Coreopsis Erianthus giganteus, PlumeGrass Eryngium yuccifolium, Rattlesnake Master Eupatorium coelestinum, Wild Ageratum Eupatorium fistulosum, Joe pye Weed Helianthus angustifolius, Swamp Sunflower Liatris spicata, Blazing Star Lobelia cardinalis, Cardinal Flower Monarda didyma, Beebalm Muhlenbergia capillaris, Pink Muhly Panicum virgatum, Switchgrass Rudbeckia spp. Black eyed Susan Solidago odora, Sweet Goldenrod Vernonia gigantean, Ironweed
119 Appendix J– Suggested native plant list for Zone F/Dry slope in power line right-of-way
(Hightshoe, Midgley, Morrison, Wasowski)
Small Trees Cercis canadensis, Redbud Cornus florida, Flowering Dogwood Juniperus virginiana, Eastern Red Cedar Morus rubra, Red Mulberry Rhus coppalina, Shining Sumac Rhus glabra, Smooth Sumac Viburnum prunifolium, Blackhaw Viburnum Viburnum rufidulum, Rusty Blackhaw Viburnum
Shrubs Ceanothus retusus, Jerseytea Ceanothus Hypericum prolificum, Shrubby St. John’s Wort Rhus aromatica, Fragrant Sumac Rhus aromatica var. Gro-low, Gro-low Fragrant Sumac Robinia hispida, Prickly Locust Rosa Carolina, Carolina Rose Symphorocarpus orbiculatus, Indiancurrant Coralberry Vaccinium corymbosum, Highbush Blueberry Vaccinium stamineum, Common Deerberry Yucca filamentosa, Yucca
Vines Lonicera sempervirens, Honeysuckle Parthenocissus quinquefolia, Virginia Creeper
Grasses Andropogon gerrardii, Big Bluestem Andropogon virginicus, Broomsedge Andropogon ternarius , Splitbeard Bluestem Muhlenbergia capillaris, Pink Muhly Schyzachyrium scoparium, LittleBluestem Sporobolus heterolepis, Prairie Dropseed
120
Appendix K– Definition of Service Learning (Learn and Serve)
What is Service Learning?
Service-learning combines service to the community with student learning in a way that improves both the student and the community. According to the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993:
Service-Learning:
-Is a method whereby students learn and develop through active participation in thoughtfully organized service that is conducted in and meets the needs of communities Is coordinated with an elementary school, secondary school, institution of higher education, or community service program and the community –Helps foster civic responsibility –Is integrated into and enhances the academic curriculum of the students, or the education components of the community service program in which the participants are enrolled –And provides structured time for students or participants to reflect on the service experience
What Does Service-Learning Look Like? In colleges and schools, service-learning is part of the academic curriculum. In community organizations, youth develop practical skills, self-esteem, and a sense of civic responsibility. Examples of service-learning projects include: preserving native plants, designing neighborhood playgrounds, teaching younger children to read, testing the local water quality, creating wheelchair ramps, preparing food for the homeless, developing urban community gardens, starting school recycling programs, and much more.
Why is Service-Learning Important? A national study of Learn and Serve America programs suggests that effective service-learning programs improve academic grades, increase attendance in school, and develop personal and social responsibility. Whether the goal is academic improvement, personal development, or both, students learn critical thinking, communication, teamwork, civic responsibility, mathematical reasoning, problem solving, public speaking, vocational skills, computer skills, scientific method, research skills, and analysis.
121